Activity number 7 analysis of natural resources

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

COASTAL ZONE
INFOL', I CENTER

ACTIVITY NUMBER 7

Analysis of Natural Resources

Pac'per~tt of __� T~sr

Uj LE~AFTKuIE O('OMMERCE NOA0
A~~iL 5[PVI~CK CHTIER
C)I 5011h HCOr<~N AVENUE
Qhi~LESTONt SC 29405-2413

N-s

/3`X ~~ New York State coastal Zone Management Program

I-.-
2:

ACTIVITY NO. 7 - ANALYSIS OF NATURAL RESOURCES

General Description

The purpose of this program activity is to continue the
first year's work of providing basic and essential resource data
as input for determining management programs and legislation and,
particularly, for defining permissible land and water uses and for
designating geographic areas of particular concern.

TASK 7.1

STATEMENT OF TASK

Mapping and Analysis of Wetlands

Products Expecte-d

1. MIaps of freshwater and tidal wetlands for the entire
coastal zone.

DEC

Progress and Prognosis

70% complete. a. Tidal wetland mapping is 95% complete.*
A problem exists in obtaining prints of these photomaps from
the contractor and a court action will determine when the
remaining maps will be available. However, DEC possesses
proof sets of all tidal wetland photomaps in appropriate
regional offices and makes this information available to
local planning agencies and others. b. Freshwater wetland
mapping is running several weeks behind schedule due to
personnel changes and computer digitizer problems. It is
expected that all work will be completed by the end of Iay,
1977.* Completed maps have been made available to CZM1
participants and other local planning and environmental
agencies. The following have taken advantage of available
maps: SLEOC; NYC Department of City Planning; Black River-
St. Lawrence RPB; Erie and Niagara Counties RPB; and Wayne,
Ulster, Rensselaer and Nassau Counties.

*See attached progress map.

2. Technical report containing data and information on
permissible uses with wetland areas.

Progress and Prognosis

60% complete. Sections covering permissible and priority
uses for the wetlands of Long Island and the Hudson River
were prepared as part of the first year report, "An Assess- *
ment of Categories Used to Inventory Areas of Particular
Concern to the Preservation and Maintenance of Fish and
Wildlife Populations in the Coastal Zone of Long Island
and the Hudson River", released in July, 1976. Similar
sections will be included in fish and wildlife habitat re-
ports prepared for the Great Lakes as part of Task 7.3.
In addition, under NYS Environmental Conservation Law,
Article 25, the State has recently adopted tidal wetland
development regulations which explicitly define incompatible *
uses and uses for which permits may be required in various
types of tidal-related wetlands. A similar approach is
being considered to implement the State's freshwater wet-
lands law (Environment Conservation Law, Article 24) and
final regulations are currently being drafted. (Granting *
of permits under present freshwater wetland interim regu-
lations is based on proof of hardship). A brief summary
report of this progress in identification of permissible
and priority uses in wetlands will be included as part of
this task at the end of the program year.

COASTAL ZONE WETLANDS

... ... ...rWS ~

ON T A~~~ , I-,AI 004 .
n. ~~~~~~~OTSEID

a ~ ~ ~ ~ ,..f-~ff a''r- .

>RSWAE WELANDSiV ' ,77If-
Mapin o f .r'". Coas#{...Zone Conte C. v sompleted

7TMAIL OFTLACAD1
777; ndFrswee MapingCmlete A.~ OTO

TASK 7.2

STATEMENT OF TASK

Flood Plain Management and Erosion Control Programs
in the Coastal Zone

Products Expected

1. Report setting forth flood plain management and erosion
control program requirements for the State's coastal zone. The
document will contain information identifying flooding and erosion
problems in each of the various major shore segments of the State.
It will also examine various alternatives for controlling or managing
these problems and recommend certain implementation measures.

DEC

Progress and Prognosis

50% complete - See attached report outline. As part of`
the first year work, an interim report was completed on
erosion, flooding and hurricane damage problems on Long IslandTs *
south shore; consideration of management alternatives for this
area is part of the second year work. In addition, work con-
tinues on schedule for the Great Lakes, Long Island Sound and
the Hudson. Recent emphasis has been on detailing the findings
of this year's work on the flooding and erosion problems of *
Lakes Erie and Ontario (west of Cayuga County) and the Niagara
River. While some elevation information on flood prone areas
for the Great Lakes is available, it is not final. The Corps
of Engineers is currently developing both open coast and
embayment flood level information for all of the Great Lakes
in a study being done for the Federal Insurance Administration
(HUD). Products of this study will not be available until the
third year State CZMl Program is under way and modifications
of present flood prone areas will be made at that time. Work
is also being carried out on the Hudson River coastal area.
Work is also under way on the Hudson River area and avail-
able flood hazard information from FIA will be utilized.
River bank and shoreline erosion is not a particular program
along the Hudson but sheet erosion on upstream tributaries
results in sedimentation problems in the coastal zone
portions of the Hudson. Work there is focusing on sedi-
mentation and the resultant need for dredging and disposal
of spoil. Some information on dredge spoil disposal and
sedimentation has been obtained from a report prepared for
the Corps of Engineers, "New York City and ':udson Riv.-er VWater
Use Study." Other sources are being investigated.

2. WMapped data identifying flood plain manage:ment and erosion
control management areas at the designated scale of 1:24,000.

DEC

Progress and Prognosis

15% Complete. Information for flood hazard mapping is
based on FIA (HUD) maps. Where more detailed surveys have been
made for FIA, in some cases the maps must be reduced to the
1:24,000 scale for CZNMP critical areas mapping. Most of this
information is available with the exception of revisions
which may be necessary as a result of further specific FIA
studies such as the work noted above on the Great Lakes. To
date, flood data have been collected for about 70% of the
coast but haveyet to be transferred to the CZMr base map
series.

A greater problem exists with erosion control in that data
at an acceptable scale is not available. Information from
the Corps of Engineers National Shoreline Survey is available
by reach and has been plotted at 1:24,000. However, better *
information is being investigated and if available will pro-
vide more exact maps. Over the next few years, it is expected
that FIA will develop much improved erosion hazard information.

In the program year final report, recommendations will be
made as to how the State should go about deriving more specific
erosion control information for use in the third year.

NOTE: aWhile other program participants were not assigned specifically
to this Task, flood plain and erosion control problems are
being covered in their other work tasks including permissible
uses and GAPC's.

ACTIVITY NO. 7

OPERATIONAL DEFINITION
OF
'DIRECT AND SIGNIFICANT IMPACT"

The result of an action which is imposed on a coastal resource in such

a way that the primary causal action can be determined to originate, or where

the medium through which the impact is conveyed is, within the State's coastal

waters and adjacent shorelands and which by itself, or cumulatively by repetition,

imposes changes in the character of the resource or on its availability for other

uses, which are not reversible or reversible only at a high economic, social,

or environmental cost, which are of relatively long duration, or which generate

social, economic and/or environmental conflicts sufficient to arouse substantial

controversy.

(.:J"~ '~K;~ ' ~~~ UNITED STATES DEPARTMEnJT OF UUMFVlftHCE
~. "..I '/ INational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[~ ~ '~"""~{ Rockville. Md. 20852

December 20, 1976

.Mr. David Kinsey
Chief, cffice of Coastal Zone Management
Department of Environmental Protection
Trenton, New Jersey 08625

Dear David:

In response to your letter of October 20, I would like to
reiterate the discussion'we had regarding GAPC's in Trenton
on November 19. We hope that this letter provides adequate
response to the issues you have raised.

First, the entire coastal zone does not need to be divided into
discrete or overlapping GAPC's. GAPC's may be designated either
site specifically, or generically, or a combination of the two
can be used. We agree with your assessment of this point cited
in your letter to David Hemmon November 24.

With regard to permissible uses and priority uses within the
coastal zone, there is a distinction to be made here. The
permissible uses requirement refers to the state having made
a determination regarding the ability of a particular area or
resource unit to support a particular use or activity. This
requirement relates to the physical capabilities of a site.
The priority use determination is a policy matter which calls
for the state to make a judgement as to how its land is to be
used. A 306 program needs to identify permitted uses throughout
the coastal zone, whether within GAPC's or outside GAPC areas.
Priority uses need to be established within all designated GAPC's.
However, generally it is the state's option whether they wish to
designate priority uses outside GAPC areas. There may be instances
where a state may wish to establish priority uses outside GAPC
areas based on an examination of the state's policies and guidelines.

It should be noted that our overriding concern is the establishment
of solid coastal zone programs. The importance of GAPC's in
obtaining this goal will depend somewhat on the degree of comprehensive
state control employed elsewhere within the coastal zone.

I hope this letter has adequately addressed the questions raised in
your October 20 letter and I feel that this confirms the conclusions
reached in your November 25 letter to David Hough..

If'I can be of further assistance on this point or others,
please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,

Kathryn Cousins
North Atlantic Regional Coordinator
Office of Coastal Zone Management

never.,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ D-aae 90

Deair David..~uh

TharZ.,s for sending ina the. copies of yonr houndary
paper. 'They are very helpful in our work,, including the
qaestion of the latexal seaward boundary.

L.ast Veek we Wet Vuit!h Kathy cousins? Joh~n K4ilholland"
~ober e-ifor and Itichard O'Cojanor frome 3WOM to revie-, our
progress t~o date. lie were able partially to clarify the
,.-,0AA interpretatIon of geographic areas of particular co-n-
cern. Here is lay current Understanding of thi's issum.

rirst, the entire coastal 2one does not have to be
lopped up into ediscrete CAPC's. Permiszi~bl: -uses are re-
quired to be identifi~ed for the GA1PC and n~on-CAPC parts of
the coastal zone. Priority uses are only essential for

runother interesting evolving interp-retat-ion concerns
t~he definitioa of' Idixect and significient" ixnpactts, As3 3
un~derstan-d- the interpretation, the phase "direct and' suffl-
ciot~could be used as a tool to define the bounda~ry of the
coastal zone. 'The statutory intent of the rederal- Coastal
Zone r'anaoe!vment Act, as articulated in Section 102, should
then beuser. to de~fine the uses subject to coastal Iiaanage-
-.ent within the designate~d coastal zon~e. !4y notes show that
Robert i-:efer c&:ed '"direct and snfficient` should he
defined arot-rd the problerms and values of a particuj.a~r
state's coazt.

I believe this is the beginning of clarification of
issues we discussed at our Cape Charles rmeetting. I re-
quested tlhatt WOA st--aff prepa~re a wriltten docuxment indi-
cating this interpret-ation of the definition of direct and

14r. Da~vid EOUCIh 1.ovem-er 24, 197C

suff cient as well as the interpretation of the reqairxenlatz3
for CZAPC's.

If you have any questions on this, please call. If
not, I look forward to seeing you again at Aixrlie hiouse.

SinCewely yours,

David N. ainsay, Chief
Office of Coastal 'Zone Management

DN~bAaa

cc: Mr. en RPexrkins, 1-laryland
Mr. Michael Wolfe, Delaware Valley Regional Planning
Ccm assion
kre, H4enry William-S, New York State
LIS. 1Zathryn Cousins, N-OA20C=CZM
Mr. john Weingart - -
Mr. tewrd ougen - - -

irzatlorva Oceanic and A~i

2031 Wiscensixz A-wen~, N...

hel:I at Caze 'Chavle -Imimiai, ca i5x &-e ~~
va dizcLuat-, Srsap~ii arm 01 partic-a-ar cllpmcrrn azd-
1r. dend Water u~~in oedti. d iz 'et

be ntated in -riting-, anJ dlrcti~d t~,;o~A a
While ye'a wer'e not privy to the 41SCUS-Arr, I ;c-
t�hat C-ev-r Bachma and -john :1 ii;' '' UfllyX

v.,c-e axn- tt~a guestiorms e, ia'--I--aed tLfSo, -a~

Kvaz 1-the ~zt~~coastal ztore bn eiie it

W-G be lut C;-~-c--of

clity Or. *R * E --.r

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. I

i~~~~nC dv,-..fi, r-t .-I

.1 ~ ~ -.

~r i.or i!~ 12v all-11 wat-r x~scl-, to 6-2:

G.-a!. zar

* ~ ~ r~~on 1o~~~, Virgin�t r.
- I -~~~~:'aae UW.f , . TC�1 Ji t

0~~~~~~~~k

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION

Geographic Areas Particular Concern FEB i 1977

Introduction

The purpose of this paper is to describe GAPC requirements and to establish

procedures for DEC's role in the identification, mapping, designation, and

management of Geographic Areas of Particular Concern in New York State's

coastal zone. Topics covered include:

-GAPC Identification and Designation Requirements of the CZM Act,

Rules and Regulations, and Threshold Papers

-Determining Acceptable and Priority Uses for GAPC's

-Developing a Management Program for GAPC's

-DEC Contract Requirements for GAPC Work

-Status of DEC GAPC Work

-Schedule for Second and Third Year DEC GAPC work

Note is made here that not all GAPC's are the responsibility of DEC to identify.

Such areas eligible for possible GAPC designation; and not falling'within DEC's

functional areas of concern, include recreational areas such as beaches; areas

where development and facilities are dependent upon a coastal location; areas

of unique geologic or topographic significance to industrial or comliercial de-

velopment; and areas of urban concentration. While CZH contractors at the

regional and local level are identifying and recommending these types of areas

for GAPC's, they are also identifying GAPC types falling within DEC's functional

areas of concern. It is extremely important, therefore, that DEC coordinate

its GAPC efforts. With local contractors to ensure that their natural resource-

related GAPC work serves as input to DEC work and that their recommendations

for development-related GAPC's are available for the identification and resolu-

tion of conflicts that may occur with DEC-recommended GAPC's.

The absence of expected guidelines from the Department of State on identifying

and evaluating GAPC's, determining acccounable and priority uses, and identify-

ing and analyzing potential conflict areas also makes it imperative that DEC

and the local contractors integrate anu coordinate their GAPC efforts. The

necessity for this is reflected in the attached schedule for second and third

year DEC GAPC work.

GAPC Identification and Designation Requirements of the CZMI Act, Rules and

Regulations, and Threshold Papers

Geographic Areas of Particular Concern (GAPC) are defined and discussed in the

Coastal Zone Management Act, the Rules and Regulations (Parts 920 and 923) and,

in particular, Threshold Paper # 3 - Geographic Areas. Threshold Paper # 2:

Land and Water Uses also discusses the requirements for development of use

priorities or policies for GAPC's.

The Act states that, as a prerequisite to Section 306 approval, each State must

provide for "an inventory and designation of areas of particular concern within

the coastal zone" (see 305(b)(3)). The Rules and Regulations (Part 920.13) and

Threshold Paper # 3 specify broad types of areas that may be considered for

designation as GAPC's including:

1. Areas of unique, scarce, fragile, or vulnerable natural habitats, physical

features, historical significance, cultural values, and scenic importance;

2. Areas of high natural productivity or essential habitat for living resources,

including fish, wildlife, and the various trophic levels in the food web crit-

ical to their well being;

3. Areas of substantial recreational value and/or opportunity;

4. Areas where developments and facilities are dependent upon the utilization

of, or access to, coastal waters;

5. Areas of unique geologic or topographic significance to industrial or com-

mercial development;

6. Areas of urban concentration where shoreline utilization and water uses

are highly competitive;

7. Areas of significant hazard if developed, due to storms, slides, floods,

erosion, settlement, etc.; and

8. Areas needed to protect, maintain or replenish coastal lands or resources,

such areas including coastal flood plains, aquifer recharge areas, sand

dunes, coral and other reefs, beaches, offshore sand deposits, and man-

grove stands.

There is a further requirement in the Act that "the management program makes pro-

visions for procedures whereby specific areas may be designated for the purpose

of preserving or restoring them for their conservation, recreational, ecological,

or aesthetic values" (Section 306(c)(9)). The threshold paper views these areas

for preservation or restoration as subcategories of GAPC's. It is emphasized

that they do not have to be actually designated prior to management program

approval but merely have procedures developed by which designation -ay eventually

be made.

The threshold paper (i'3) emphasizes that '"mere designation of GAPC's is not ade-

quate; the process of designation must lead to specific recognition and action

within the framework of the management program." Accordingly, to achieve OCZM

management program approval (306), the process used for the identification and

designation of GAPC's must be described and include at least the following steps:

1. Identification of the criteria used for identifying GAPC's including

consideration of the broad types of areas listed in one to eight above.

2. A review of the characteristics of the state's entire coastal zone and

application of the selected criteria to indicate candidate sites for

designation.

-4-

3. A description of the characteristics of each area selected which are

indicative of the need for spec>.. management techniques. Interpretative

note: This should not be interpreted as requiring that each GAPC area

selected must be so described. Rather, it should be interpreted such

that only unique, significant or fragile type GAPC's require site-specific

descriptions. Specific coastal resource-type GAPC's (wetlands, dunes, shell-

fish beds, etc.) would require only general, non-site specific descriptions.

4. A description of the boundaries of each GAPC, with the degree of detail

and preciseness varying according to the special management techniques

proposed. Where regulatory authority is relied upon, for example, precise

boundaries are essential. With other management tools, such as resource

management activities to improve shellfish beds, a more general descrip-

tion may be sufficient.

5. A description of the GAPC designation procedure to include:

a. identification of the agency or agencies empowered to make

such designations.

b. actual written designation cf the GAPC for specified purposes

(does not apply to areas for preservation or restoration).

Interpretative note: This refers to the acceptable land and

water uses determined as appropriate for each type of CAPC.

c. identification of the agency or agencies empowered to formu-

late policy and implement management techniques for the GAPC's.

6. A description of the procedures by which specific CAPC's may be designated

as areas for preservation or restoration.

Threshold Paper #3 suggests two basic acceptable ways for selecting GAPC's which

could be used singly or in combination:

1. Qualification: Qualifying criteria could be developed and applied to the

entire coastal zone, resulting in the possible designation as GAPC's of all

areas of a single resource, such as sand dunes adjoining beaches. No

further designation of such areas would be required to fulfill this

threshold. More selective criteria could also be developed and applied

for designating more unique type areas where special management techniques

may be important, e.g. habitat of a rare and endangered animal species, a

particularly significant wetland, or an area with an especially scenic

vista. Note - It is important to reiterate that �APC's may be of two types,

either specific resource areas within the coastal zone (beaches, wetlands,

shellfish beds, etc.) or unique or especially significant areas where

special management techniques are required to control uses. An example

of such techniques would be direct land or easement pruchase by a unit

of government to ensure that acceptable uses are controlled.

2. Nomination: Local governments, other state agencies and the public could

be involved in GAPC selection. For this procedure to be acceptable, guide-

lines are required which reflect state concerns around which such nomin-

ations can be submitted and reviewed.

Determining Acceptable and Priority Uses For GAPC's

"Threshold Paper #2: Land and Water Uses" describes the processes to be used for

the determination of acceptable (acceptable and permissible are interchangeable

terms) land and water uses within the coastal zone. There are two major require-

ments that apply with respect to GAPC's:

1. A rationale must be developed for the determination of acceptable land

and water uses in designated GA '. This rationale is to form the basis

for regulating and/or managing these uses for GAPC's. For developing a

- rationale, the threshold paper states tam t an analysis should be under-

taken of (a) the impact of each use (or the effects of such use of class

of uses) upon the CAPC; and (b) the compatibility, or suitability of each

use with other uses in close proximity.

2. Policies or priorities for uses in GAPC's must be developed and incorporated

into the management program.

Developing a Management Program for GAPC's

There are two types of management categories applicable, depending upon the nature

of the GAPC. As noted under "(1) Qualification" above, GAPC's may be either

designated from specific resource areas (beaches, wetlands, shellfish beds, etc.)

or from unique or especially significant areas (habitat of a rare and endangered

animal species, a scenic vista, etc.). The first management category consists of

those GAPC's designated from specific resource areas. According to Threshold

Paper 0'3, policies or priorities developed for this category of GAPC's "must form

the basis for the preparation of rules and regulations or other implementing

guidance which uses legal authority over land and siater uses".

On the other hand, for the second category of CAPC's no such requirement exists,

although regulatory authority can be used. More often, Threshold Paper #3 suggests,

special management techniques or tools would be used, such as "creative use of A-95

reviews, direct land or easement purchase, etc". For these types of CAPC's the

final step of identifying and applying specific management tools for each GAPC

is not required at the time of management program approval but can be "scheduled for

completion within a reasonable time after approval, say one year". Requirements

for this final step are:

1. a description of how special management policies and techniques will

apply to each GAPC, to include:

a. objectives and policies for management of each area consistent

with area characteristics.

b. specific management tools which will be applied to GAPC's above

and beyond the basic authorities needed to carry out the manage-

ment program throughout the coastal zone.

DEC Contract Requirements for GAPC Work

The second year CZM contract calls for DEC to map and analyze GAPC's to include:

- inventory and analyses of significant fish and wildlife habitats

- identification and analyses of other possible GAPC's such as agricultural

areas, forest lands, aquifers, and mineral deposits.

- designation of areas for preservation or restoration

- assist in determining acceptable and priority uses in identified CAPC's

(This was to be carried out in accordance w,,ith guidelines developed by DOS.

These have not been promulgated).

Status of DEC CAPC Work

Based on inventory work accomplished to date, DEC has identified the following

types of areas that may be considered for designation as GAPC's, although other

types may be considered as work progresses:

I. Tidal wetlands

2. Freshwater wetlands

3. Estuaries and embayments

4. Coastal ponds

5. Tidal mudflats

6. Littoral zones

7. Deepwater habitats

8. Shellfish beds

9. Tributary streams

10. Fish and wildlife concentration areas

11. Rare, threatened and endangered species habitat

12. Lake Trout spawning grounds

13. Unique ecological areas

14. Barrier beaches/sand dunes

15. Agricultural lands of significance

1.6. Forest land suitable for forest management

17. Prime groundwater aquifers and/or sources of public water supply

18. 100 year flood plains

[9. Steep slopes

20. Highly erodible areas

21. Urban open space suitable as wildlife habitat -

22. Public boating and fishing access sites

23. Non-renewable resource areas

24. Water quality limiting segments

Mapping of GAPC boundaries will be accomplished, where feasible, by March 3], 1977.

The mapping will be done on the coastal zone base maps prepared by DEC.

SCHEDULE FOR SECOND AND THIRD YEAR DEC GAPC WORK

The following is a detailed work schedule indicating the task sequence for com-

pletion of DEC's GAPC work early in the third year CZM program. An interim

second year report to be completed and submitted to the Department of State

before March 31, 1977 will consist of those products scheduled for completion

before that date, as indicated below.

TASK Draft Product Completion

1. Revise GAPC concepts paper January 13

2. Prepare tentative outline of report January 13
to be submitted on March 31

3. Prepare flow chart of GAPC tasks January 13

4. Prepare final list of types of DEC- January 13
recommended GAPC's

5. Develop preliminary brief descriptions January 14
of CAPC types indicating criteria for
identification, boundaries, statewide
distribution, rationale for GAPC desi-
gnation, acceptable and priority uses,
regulatory and/or management techni-
ques, data sources and inventory status

6. Detail and refine, in consultation with January 21
program divisions, the initial criteria
developed in #5 for the identification of
possible GAPC's

7. Review during on-site visits, preliminary Three weeks following
GAPC descriptions (#5) and detailed cri- January 31
teria (#6) with local contractors; obtain
and review their GAPC recommendations

8. Using detailed criteria (#6) and input from February 15
local contractors (#7), determine specific
locations of and make final recommendations
for GAPC status of areas that are ecologi-
cally unique, significant, or fragile; re-
view locations of and make final recommenda-
tions for GAPC status of broad coastal re-
source types (wetlands, dunes, shellfish
beds, etc.)

TASK Draft Product Completion

9. In order to meet OCZM Threshold March 4
requirements, describe, in greater
detail than in # 5, characteristics
for the two categories of DEC recom-
mended GAPC's: (a) site specific
descriptions for each unique, signi-
ficant or fragile type GAPC; and (b)
general, non-site specific descri-
ptions for the broad coastal re-
source type GAPC's.

10. Describe and map boundaries, where March 31
feasible, for recommended GAPC's.

11. Review GAPC recommendations with
DEC divisions and local contractors Week of March 14

12. Develop criteria for and recommend April 1
GAPC'ts suitable for preservation or
restoration.

13. Develop a rationale for the deter- April 8
mination of acceptable and priority
uses for DEC-recommended CAPC's; in-
clude analysis of the impacts or
effects of each use or class of
uses upon the GAPC and the compati-
bility or suitability of each use
with other uses in close proximity.

14. Determine and recommend, in con- April 15
junction with DEC divisions and
local contractors, acceptable and
priority uses for DEC-recommended
GAPC's.

15. Develop recommendations on manage- May 15
ment policies and techniques for
controlling uses in DEC-recommended GAPC's

16. Identify and resolve conflicts between June 15
DEC-recommended GAPC's and development-
related GAPC's recommended by local
contractors.

Outline of DEC GAPC Report to be Submitted
To DOS By March 31, 1977

The following is an outline of the interim report on Geographic Areas of

particular Concern to be submitted to DOS by March 31, 1977 in order to

meet contract requirements under Task 7.3 of the 2nd year CZM work program.

This report will describe second year DEC work on the inventory of natural

resource areas and the identification and recommendation of areas for GAPC

status. It will not be a complete report on GAPC's since the work related

to determining acceptable and priority uses plus the identification and

resolution of conflicts between DEC-recommended GAPC's and development-re-

lated DEC's will be carried on into the first three months of the third

year program. Accompanying the report will be maps identifying GAPC lo-

cations and boundaries, throughout the State's coastal zone. There will

be several other attachments: a GAPC Concept Paper which describes GAPC

requirements and establishes procedures for DEC's role in the identifi-

cation, mapping, designation and management of GAPC's; a flow chart depict-

ing GAPC 2nd and 3rd year work tasks; and Technical Assessments of-the fish

and wildlife resources inventoried in the Long Island, New York City, Hudson

River and Great Lakes CZ areas.

I. Introduction

A. Purpose of report

B. Summary of findings

II. Description of DEC's CZM first and second year CZM resource inventory process

as it relates to GAPC recommendations

A. Significant fish and wildlife habitats

B. Tidal and freshwater wetlands

C. Water supply

D. Flood plain management and erosion control

E. Water quality

F. Soils and slopes

G. Non-renewable resources

III. Determination,listing, and descriptions of types of natural resource areas

proposed for DEC-recommended GAPC's.

IV. Determination of criteria for GAPC identification

A. Description of criteria development process

B. Refinement of criteria

1. Review with DEC program divisions

2. Review with local CZM contractors

V. Identification of and recommendations for DEC-related GAPC's

A. Input from local contractors

B. Specific locations for GAPC status of areas that are ecologically unique,

significant, or fragile.

C. Specific locations of and final DEC recommendations for GAPC status of

broad coastal resource types (Wetlands, dunes, shellfish, beds, etc.)

VI. Detailed descriptions of DEC-recommended GAPC's

A. Site-specific descriptions for each unique,significant or fragile type

GAPC including boundary descriptions.

B. General, non-site specific descriptions for broad coastal resource type

GAPC's, including discussion of boundaries.

VII. Reviews of GAPC reconmendations with DEC divisions and local contractors.

VIII. Recommendations for GAPC's suitable for preservation or restoration (APR's)

C- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I A .- -

W!-ti 06. Mat ri x,,

t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IN

~~~~~~1~~~~~~~~~~~

-7~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ I I T TA- 9,Lt,-J

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~fp F- LD P M Lo T

4.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A ---__

'~~~~~~~~~~~~~<i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -7 P ..r C-'?\b'- C~-: ~
-T~~~~~~~~ ~j- 1-

List of DEC Natural Resource Type GAPC's

The list at tne end of this paper represents the types of natural resource areas

which will be reconmmended by DEC for GAPC status at certain locations in coastal

areas. The areas listed reflect the requirements of the CZM rules and regula-

tions (Part 920.13) and OCZM Threshold Paper 43 which specify eight broad types

of areas that may be considered for designation as GAPC's. Seven of these types

of areas form the basis for DLC's list. These seven are as follows:

1. Areas of unique, scarce, fragile, or vulnerable natural habitats,

physical features, historical significance, cultural values, and

scenic importance;

2. Areas of high natural productivity or essential habitat for living

resources, including fish, wildlife, and the various trophic levels

in the food web critical to their well-being;

3. Areas of substantial recreational value and/or opportunity;

4. Areas of significant hazard if developed, due to storms, slides, floods,

erosion, settlement, etc.;

5. Areas needed to protect, maintain or replenish coastal lands or resources,

such areas including coastal flood plains, aquifer recharge areas, sand

dunes, coral and other reefs, beaches, offshore sand deposits, and man-

grove stands;

6. Areas where developments and facilities are dependent upon the utiliza-

tion of, or access to, coastal waters;

7. Areas of unique geologic or topographic significance to industrial or

commercial development.'

The following ten types of areas being considered for GAPC status by DEC contain

different sub-area types within them. For example, an area recommended for GAPC

FEB 4 1977

status because it is an essential and productive natural habitat may have been so

recommended because it is valuable underwater habitat for shellfish, or because

it is a coastal freshwater wetland, or a tributary stream valuable for spawning

purposes. In some cases, the GAPC may contain two or more different sub-areas.

These different sub-area types will be shown on maps de.icting GAPC's throughout

the state. The ten GAPC types are:

1. Essential or productive natural habitats

2. Special ecological areas

3. Agricultural lands of significance

4. Significant forest lands

5. Prime groundwater aquifers and/or sources of public water supply

6. Natural hazard areas

7. Urban open space suitable as wildlife habitat

8. Public boating and fishing access sites

9. Non-renewable resource areas

10. Water quality limiting segments

In addition to these ten GAEC types, there are two additional type areas in which

DLEC has an interest, but only limited management responsibilities. These are

"areas of scenic importance' and."areas of historical or cultural significance".

The former is of interest because of bLC's statutory concern for natural beauty

and tne latter because of DEC's participation in the State Nature and Historic

Preserve.

' GAPC Type
Essential or productive natural habitats

Criterin for Identification

0b ~ Essential or productive natural habitats comprise only those embayments,
tributary streams, littoral zones, coastal wetlands including mudflats
and swamps, adjacent upland habitats, or remote habitats used by coastal
populations which support:

a. Substantial numbers of a species possessing important recreational,
cultural or commercial value.

b. A species which would be seriously diminished within the immediate
physiographic region if the area were lost as habitat.

c. A species maintaining an important food chain relationship with such
species classed above.

Boundaries

Generally speaking, the minimum peripheral boundaries should include those
buffer areas which are essential for the maintenance airid protection of the
viability of the area of concern. For example, an estuarine area might
include adjacent tidal wetlands, tidal mudflats, littoral zones, tributary
streams, etc.

Statewide Distribution of Possible Areas
Statewide

Rationale for GAPC Designation

"Areas of high natural productivity or essential habitat for living resources."
(GZM Rules and Regulations Part 920.13)

Acceptable Uses

Resource management and recreation would be acceptable uses throughout the
entire area of concern. However, in especially ecologically fragile areas
recreation should be limited to more passive forms such as nature study,
photography, non-motorized boating, etc. Aquaculture would be a permissible
use as well as an activity of tremendous commercial importance in certain
areas.

Priority Uses

Uses should preserve or enhance the primary ecological functions of each
particular area.

Possible Regulatory and Management Techniques

a. Tidal wetlands
b. Freshwater wetlands
c. Wild, scenic and recreational rivers
d. SPDES
_s ~e. Marine and coastal resources
f. National Flood Insurance Program

g. Wetland acquisition and restoration
h. Fish propagation and management
i. Approval of new solid waste m: 2ment facilities
j. Waste collection registration p:ogram
k. Oil spill contingencies and liabilities
1. Protection of waters
m. Fish and wildlife management act
n. State nature and historical preserve trust
o. Parks and recreation
p. Local zoning

Data Sources

a. DEC fish and wildlife
b. Local, regional or county planning boards
c. Private individuals and groups

Status of Inventory

DEC's work on the Long Island/NYC/Hudson River area is nearly complete,
Great Lakes to be finished by March 31, 1977.

2GAPC Type

Special ecological areas.

Criteria for Identification

Special ecological areas shall include:
a. Lake trout spawning sites
b. Wildlife or fish concentration areas
c. Habitats for rare, threatened, endangered or diminishing species
d. Scarce, unique or fragile ecological areas
e. Vulnerable habitats

Boundaries

Boundaries must include enough buffer area to insure the integrity of the
ecological area.

Statewide Distribution of Possible Areas

Statewide

Rationale for GAPC Designation:

"Areas of unique scarce, fragile, or vulnerable natural habitats, or physical
feature." (CZM Rules and Regulations Part 920.13)

Acceptable Uses

Varies, however uses should be limited to ones which will not diminish the
quality which makes each particular area special.

Priority Use

Preservation or enhancement of each areas special qualities.

Possible Regulatory and Management Techniques

a. Tidal wetlands
b. Freshwater wetlands
c. Wetland acquisition and restoration
d. Protection of waters
e. Marine and coastal resources
f. Fish and wildlife management act
g. Wild scenic and recreational rivers
h. Parks and recreation
i. State nature and historical preserve trust
j. Endangered plant species protection
k. Local zoning

Data Sources

a. DEC fish and wildlife
b. Local, county and regional planning agencies
c. Private individuals and groups

Status of Inventory
Long Island and Hudson River complete; Great Lakes to be done by March 31, 1977.

GAPC Type

Agricultural lands of significance

Criteria for Identification

Criteria pertaining to soil characteristics and physical features are de-
fined in: "Technical Report on the Identification and Napping of Prime
Farmland in the Coastal Zone Management Area of New York." Social and
economic factors developed by Conklin and Linton in "The Nature and Distri-
bution of Farming in New York State" are also considered.

Boundaries

Varies

Statewide Distribution of Possible Areas

Much significant agricultural land exists along LakcsOntario and Erie ex-
cept close to urban areas. Some significant farmlands are scattered
along the Hudson River and eastern Long Island.

Rationale for GAPC Distribution

"Areas needed to protect, maintain, or replenish coastal lands or resources."
(CZM Rules and Regulations Part 920.13)

Acceptable Uses

Resource management, agriculture, agriculture related commercial and resi-
dential, non-intensive recreation (hunting, field activities, etc.)

Priority Use

Agriculture

Possible Regulatory and Management Techniques

a. Freshwater wetlands
b. National flood insurance program
c. Waste collection registration program
d. Mined .land.reclamation
e. Wild, scenic and recreational rivers program
f. Agricultural districting
g. Local zoning

Data Sources

a. "Nature and Distribution of Farming in New York State," Conklin, 1969.
b. Technical Report on the Identification and Mapping of Prime Farmland in
the Coastal Zone Management Area of New York."
c. SCS
d. Local, county or regional planning boards.

Status of Inventory

M ppilg of rime agricultural soils is approximately 1/3 complete. Mapping
of Prime farmland socio-economic. soil and physical factors) has not been
started.

GAPC Type

Significant Forest Lands

Criteria for Identification

Forest lands must be of sufficient quality and size to possess natural and/or
economic value.

Boundaries

Varies with each location

Statewide Distribution of Possible Areas

Inventory not started by CZM staff.

Rationale for GAPC Designation

"Areas of essential habitat for living resources" and'areas needed to pro-
tect, maintain or replenish coastal lands or resources." (CZM Rules and
Regulations Part 920.13).

Acceptable Uses

Resource management, nature study, recreation and limited transportation.

Priority Use

Forest Management

Possible Regulatory and Management Techniques

a. State nature and historical reserve trust
b. Land and forest resources
c. Forest Practice Act
d. Revised forest tax law
e. 1980 "Farm" plans (including forest lands)
f. Wild, scenic and recreational rivers
g. Protection of Natural and man-made beauty
h. Parks and recreation
i. Local zoning

Data Sources

a. DEC lands and forests
b. Local, county or regional planning boards
c. LUNR maps

Status of Inventory

Not started by CZM staff.

GAPC Type

Prime groundwater aquifers and/or sources of public water supply.

Criteria for Designation

Those areas delineated in "Report on Water Supply Studies for Coastal Zone
Management Program."

Boundaries

Varies

Statewide Distribution of Possible Areas

All CZ Subareas except L.I. Most of the major aquifers are located along
the Hudson River. All major aquifers identified except two are used as
sources of public water supply several other aquifers of importance can
be found along the south shore of Lake Ontario. These are municipal in-
takes of water from Lakes Erie and Ontario plus the Hudson and St. Lawrence
Rivers. Long Island Subarea. All public water supply of Nassau and Suffolk
counties is derived from three major aquifers. There are five municipal
and two private suppliers of public water supply.

Rationale for CAPC Designation

"Areas needed to protect, maintain or replenish coastal lands or resources..."
(CZM Rules and Regulations Part 920.13).

Acceptable Uses

Any use which does not preclude the water from being a present or potential
source of public water supply.

Priority Use

Public water supply

Possible Regulatory and Management Techniques

a. Realty subdivisions: Sewerage Service and water supply
b. SPDES
c. Protection of waters
d. water supply approval
e. River improvement program
f. Siting of major stream electric generating facilities
g. Approval of new solid waste management facilities
h. Waste collection registration program
i. Local zoning

Data Sources

a. "Report on Water Supply Studies for Coastal Zone Management Program."
b. "5a" county water supply reports.

Status of Inventory

Complete

GAPC Type

Natural Hazard Areas

Criteria for Identification

Such areas will include 100 year flood plains, areas of steep slopes
(greater than 15%), highly erodible areas or other areas that would
be a hazard if developed.

Boundaries

Varies with each category and location.

Statewide Distribution of Possible Areas

Statewide

Rationale for GAPC Designation

"Areas of significant hazard if developed, due to storms, slides, floods,
erosion, settlement, etc." (CZM Rules and Regulations Part 920.13).

Acceptable Uses

Flood plains - recreation, agriculture, resource management, open space,
limited transportation.

Steep slopes - Forestry, watershed management, recreation.

Highly erodible areas - resource management

Priority Use

Flood plains - varies with location
Steep slopes - Forestry
Highly erodible areas - propagation of permanent vegetation to stabilize soils.

Possible Regulatory and Management Techniques

a. Tidal wetlands
b. Freshwater wetlands
c. Protection of waters
d. National flood insurance program
e. River imprcverient program
f. Wild, scenic and recreational rivers program
g. Local zoning

Data Sources

a. Official HUD flood hazard boundary maps
b. Local, county or regional planning boards
c. DEC

Status of Inventory

400 year flood plains - completely mapped; steep slopes - mapping completed
Y some contracors;shoteline eroosion- mapping completed by at least 3
local contractors.

GAPC Type

Urban open space suitable as wildlife habitat

Criteria for Identification

Suitable open space may consist of uplands with a minimum of shrubs and
grasses as vegetation, on banks or shorelands of wetlands, ponds, lakes,
or streams. Total acreage must be at least 5 acres and shall be located
with the confines of an urban area with a population of at least 10,000.

Boundaries

Generally, cultural features such as roads, rail lines or easily identi-
fiable property boundaries should be used in urban areas.

Statewide Distribution of Possible Areas

Statewide

Rationale for GAPC Designation

"Areas of unique, scarce, fragile or vulnerable natural habitats.. .cul-
tural values and scenic importance." (CZM4 Rules and Regulations Part
920.13).

Acceptable Uses

Uses that would not interfere with the nesting, feeding, reproduction,
migration, movement or other natural processes necessary to support pre-
sent or potential wildlife populations. Resource management, nature
study, and limited recreation would be permissible.

Priority Use

Management for propagation of wildlife populations. Establishment of
nature trails or study areas to provide a wildlife or nature study ex-
perience for urban dwellers.

Possible Regulatory and >anagement Techniques

a. Freshwater wetlands
b. Tidal wetlands
c. Wetland acquisition and restoration
d. Fish and wildlife management act
e. Land and forest resources
f. Parks and recreation (state or local)
g. Wild, scenic and recreational rivers
h. State nature and historical preserve trust
i. Gas pipeline and electric transmission certification
j. Waste collection registration program.
k. Local zoning

Data Sources

a. Local planning boards
b. Regional/county planning boards
c. DEC fish and wlldlife

Inventory Status

Hudson River, NYC, Long Island comrn ted. Great Lakes area to be completed
by March 31, 1977.

GACP Type

Public boating and fishing access sites

Criteria for Identification

Such areas shall be at least of local interest or importance and provide
parking, facilities or areas for boat launching and access to fish.

Boundaries

Varies

Statewide Distribution of Possible Areas

There are 32 such areas existing throughout the state as recognized by DEC
Fish and Wildlife and OPR. 23 areas are located in the Erie/Ontario/St.
Lawrence Region and 9 in the Hudson/Long Island Region.

There are 75 areas identified as being potential access sites statewide.

Rationale for GAPC Designation

"Areas where developments and facilities are dependent upon the utilization
of, or access to, coastal waters". (CZM Rules and Regulations Part 920.13).

Acceptable Uses

Any use which'would not preclude the area from being a present or potential
access site for boating, fishing, or other water sport activity.

Priority Use

Public boating and fishing access site.

Possible Regulatory and Management Techniques

a. Tidal wetlands
b. Freshwater wetlands
c. National Flood Insurance Program
d. Shore erosion control program
e. Public access to fishing areas
f. River improvement program
g. Local zoning

Data Sources

a. DEC
b. OPR

Status of Inventory

Complete

C CAPC Type.

Nonrenewable resource areas

Criteria for Identification

Areas containing commercially important reserves of nonrenewable resources.

Boundaries

Varies

Statewide Distribution of Possible Areas

Along the Hudson River important deposits of high quality marble, granite,
sand gravel, clay and other minerals can be commercially excavated. Lake
Erie, Lake Ontario and especially Long Island all contain deposits of sand
and gravel. Lake Erie also has a good potential for natural gas production.

Rationale for GAPC Designation

"Areas of unique geologic or topographic significance to industrial or com-
mercial development." (CZM Rules and Regulations Part 920.13).

Acceptable Uses

Any uses which don't economically or physically preclude the future use of
the resource.

Priority Use

Possible Regulatory and Management Techniques

a. Oil spill contingencies and liabilities
b. Nined land reclamation
c. Oil and gas well spacing, pooling and utilization
d. Oil and gas leases on state lands
e. Plugging oil and gas wells
f. Protection of waters
g. Tidal wetlands
h. Freshwater wetlands
i. Public lands law

Data Sources

a. State geological survey

Status of Inventory

Much available data. CZM staff has not yet started to gather data.

/l GAPC Type

Water quality limiting segments

Criteria for Designation

Any water segment for which it is deemed that more stringent requirements
beyond "Best Practicable Treatment" are necessary to maintain applicable
water quality stream standards.

Boundaries

As delineated by the N.Y.S. Water Quality Management Plan.

Statewide Distribution of Possible Areas

The majority of water classified water quality limiting are located in the
Long Island-NYC region. All Long Island ground water is classified water
quality limiting. Other segments include several tributaries of Lakes
Erie and Ontario and a portion of the Hudson River below Troy.

Rationale for GAPC Designation

"Areas needed to protect, maintain or replenish coastal lands or resources"
and "essential habitat for living resources, including fish..." (CaM Rules
and Regulations Part 920.13).

Acceptable Uses

Any uses which are compatible with the assigned best usage classifications.

Priority Use

Fishing, swimming

Possible Regulatory and Management Techniques

a. SPDES
b. Tidal wetlands
c. Freshwater wetlands
d. River improvement program
e. Siting of major stream electric generating facilities
f. Approval of new solid waste management facilities
g. Waste collection registration program
h. Fish propogation and management
i. Marine and coastal resources
j. Oil spill contingencies and liabilities
k. Plugging oil and gas wells
1.

Data Sources

a. NYS Water Quality Management Plans
b. "NYS Continuing Planning Process-1973."

Inventory Status

Classification of water bodies as water quality limiting segments is a
continuing process, with additional redesignations probable. The "N.Y.S.
Continuing Planning Process-1973 has completed a preliminary inventory

-2-

of New York State. In the development of the N.Y.S. Water Quality Manage-
ment Plans more detailed segment evaluations' were made. The Coastal Zone
is located within 11 sub-basins of which 6 have water quality management
plans completed.

'GAPC Type
Areas of historical or cultural significance.

Criteria for Designation
a. National historic register and/or
b. State list of historical sites and.or
c. State nature and historical reserve trust - designated lands and
nominations

Boundaries
Varies

Statewide Distribution of Possible Areas
Statewide

Rationale for GAPC Designation
"Areas of unique, scarce, fragile or vulnerable... historical significance,
cultural values and scenic inportance."

Acceptable Uses
Varies

Priority Uses
To preserve or enhance the qualities that make each area historically or
cultural significant.

Possible Regulatory and Management Techniques
a. State Nature and historical preserve trust.
b. Wild, scenic and recreational rivers program
c. Protection of natural and man-made beauty
d. Parks and recreation

Data Sources
a. OPR
b. IRVC (Hudson River Valley Commission)
c. Subcontractors

Status of Inventory
DEC has mapped historical sites along the Hudson River. Other contractors
have started and completed similar mapping.

GACP Type
Areas of scenic importance

Criteria for Identification
LISS Criteria
Topographic complexity
Shoreline complexity
Vegetative integrity
Vegetative diversity
Color (Hue) ingredients
Pictorial composition
Vividness
Shore dynamics
Ecosystem continuity
Near/far contrast
Uniqueness (scarcity)
Endangerment
True-to-form rurality
True-to-form townscapes
Human dynamics
Aksence oP detractions
Instructive qualities
Soil/island horizons
Sensitivity to change

Boundaries
Varies

Statewide Distribution of Possible Areas
Statewide

Rationale for GAPC Designation
"Areas of unique, scarce, fragile or vulnerable...scenic importance."

Acceptable Uses
Any uses which would not diminish an areas scenic quality.

Priority Uses
Any uses which would enhance or preserve an areas scenic qualities.

Possible Regulatory and Management Techniques
a. Protection of Natural and Man-Made Beauty
b. Tidal wetlands
c. Freshwater wetlands
d. Protection of waters
e. Gas pipeline and electric transmission line certification
f. Approval of new soild waste management facilities
g. Land and forest resources
h. Wild scenic and recreational rivers
i. State nature and historical preserve
j. Agricultural districting
k. Parks and recreation (local or state)
1. Transportation.

AN ASSESSMENT OF CATEGORIES USED TO INVENTORY
AREAS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN TO THE PRESERVATION
AND MAINTENANCE OF FISH AND WILDLIFE POPULATIONS
IN THE COASTAL ZONE OF LONG ISLAND
AND THE HUDSON RIVER

Prepared by

Ne'w York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Division of Fish and Wildlife
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12233

The preparation of this report was financially aided
through a Federal Grant from the Office of Coastal Zone
Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.

This report was prepared under the Coastal Zone Management
Act of 1972 for the Division of State Planning, Department
of State.

July 22, 1976

Grant Number: 04-5-158-50002

Category - Tributary streams

Definition - Tributary streams in the coastal zone are those flowing waters of
natural origin which empty into a larger estuary or inland sea (Great Lakes).
They will be managed upstream from the mouth to the first impassable gradient or
barrier to fish migration.

Description - Depending on the location of the first impassable gradient or barrier
to fish migration, the coastal zone portion of such streams may include only estuarine
water as a "backwater" or cove, or it may extend upstream into fast running water.

Fast streams - flow rate of at least fifty cm. per second, bottom
consists of gravel and rubble. Fast streams are cold and saturated
with oxygen. They typically consist of riffles or rapids alternating
with pools.

Slow streams - with decreasing gradient, velocities fall, temperature
increases, oxygen decreases. Small particles of organic matter, silt
and sand accumulate on the bottom. Rooted aquatic plants grow in the
shallows.

Extent and Distribution (Long Island) Because the sandy coarse soils of Long Island
are excessively drained, most water flow is subsurface. The surface streams on Long
Island are short and characterized by low flow at all seasons. Only five consistently
release more than 20 cubic feet of water into tidewater per second. These are the
Nissequoque, the Peconic River, Beaverdam Creek, The Connetciuot and the Carmans River.

Extent and Distribution (Hudson River) - The Hudson flows almost unvaringly due south
from Troy dam. The study area is contained in 15 sets of 7- min U.S.G.S. topographic
quadrangle sheets, arranged from north to south. Each of the 15 comprises one or more
quadrangles arranged from west to east. There are 24 different quadrangles described
in 18 separate map reports. The distributions are referenced to the North-South sets
anid each is considered a separate reach of the river. The distribution and amount
of tributary streams accessible to migrating fish per reach is:

3.7 mi, 4.1 mi, 0 mi, 12.4 mi, 13.3 mi, 7.0 mi, 5 mi, 19.2 mi, 0 mi, 1.3 mi,
5.4 mi, 0 mi, 5.5 mi, 6.5 mi, 4.1 mi, 10.2 mi, and one mile.

Ecological Significance - Function - Except where rejuvenated by uplift, tributaries
approaching confluence with an estuary are nearly at base level. With reduced gradient,
these waters become torpid and, in terms of life forms and abundance, serve as fingerlike
nontidal extensions of the estuary. A littoral zone is developed and, because the land
is poorly drained for lack of gradient, marshes and wooded swamps form on the frequently
flooded bottomlands. These areas provide haven for various waterfowl, deer, small
mammals, songbirds, woodcock, kingfisher, coot, herons, osprey, and various reptiles
and amphibians.

The shallow waters are used for spawning by several fish indigneous to the estuary
including yellow perch, white perch, large and smallmouth bass, sunfish and pickerel.

As gradient increases upstream, mud and silt give way to sand and gravel then
to gravel and rubble. To cope with the increased current, fish of the coldwater
upstream have highly streamlined bodies and strong lateral muscles. Vegetation is
reduced to algae and water moss attached to rocks with strong holdfasts. Insects
are confined to riffles on the sheltered undersides of gravel and rubble. Exceptional
species are the waterstriders, nymphs of dragonflies, damselflies and some mayflies
found in pools. Cyprinid minnows, important as forage fish and suckers, salmonids,
herring and smelt require the current and stony bottoms for spawning grounds.

Values. The values of tributary streams to estuarine fish and wildlife hinge on
human impacts, principally shoreline alteration, pollution, and barriers to fish
migration. Streams allowed to flow unimpeded and unpolluted to the estuary support
an anadromous fishery commensurate with their size. These fisheries include smelt,
herring, alewife and, in larger tributaries, shad and striped bass. The shallows
just above tidewater may be potential spawning sites for sturgeon. These large
, fish, valued for their roe (from which caviar is made), have become rare. Pollution C. -
and overfishing are cited as reasons for the decline. (LaBastille, 1973)

The stripped bass fishery is of enormous recreational importance. In New York, '
the Hudson River fishery is but a small part of the total resource which is most
valuable in terms of angler success on Long Island. The shad fishery has great
potential as a recreational resource. It is unique to a limited number of north
central Atlantic coastal rivers which are ascended yearly by hundreds_pf thousands
of these three to eight pound fish. Both the roe and the flesh of the adult fish
are epicurean delights. The fish, an eager biter when approached by the proper
lure is a game fighter. Smelt, herring and alewife are commercial or potentially
commercial resources which should be enhanced by stream management designed to
provide access to spawning grounds.

If left in natural vegetation, the seasonally flooded rich bottomlands provide
fine hunting for ruffed grouse, woodcock, squirrel, deer, blackduck, mallards and
woodducks. The amateur naturalist as well as the research ecologist values these
areas for the diverse avifauna which includes not only the cosmopolitan species,
but also birds such as the Louisiana Waterthrush, Cerulean Warbler, Hooded Warbler,
Swamp Sparrow, Snipe and Solitary Sandpiper, which are specific to this habitat.
The bottoms are also valued for their reptilian and amphibian populations. Furbearing
mammals such as fox, muskrat and weasel provide additional resource values which
can be subject to management for sustained yield.

Permissible Uses- To maintain the varied resources of the estuary, tributary streams
should be managed in two zones. The primary zone, a land use control zone should
include river or stream and associated bottomlands to the first impassable gradient
or barrier to fish migration. The secondary zone, a pollution control zone, would
reach to the sources of all secondary tributaries. This pollution control would
be tailored to prevent accumulating pollutants from compromising the quality of
primary zone resources. This does not proscribe use of these waters as a vehicle
for waste removal, but it will limit that use to levels which will not impair
valued downstream resources. In each individual case diminuation of the natural

of the natural resource base should be weighed against the value to society of the
expedience of discharging various increments of pollution overload.

In the primary zone, waste discharge should be limited to amounts the stream can
process without causing conditions which would inhibit or prevent use of these
waters by anadromous species. Land uses other than those which would leave the
bottom lands in their natural state, hunting, fishing, trapping, nature walks,
backpacking trails and other extensive uses, should be limited to those requiring
water access such as power plants. These water requiring developments should be
located where natural resources values are lowest to avoid unnecessary losses.

Category. Wetlands swith associated upland buffer zone

Definition. Wetlands are lands where the water table is at or near the surface.
This may be a seasonal or permanent condition.

Description. Coastal wetlands are marshes or swamps (wooded wetlands) flooded
periodically by estuarine waters with the tides. These wetlands are classified
according to frequency of tidal flooding and salinity.

Intertidal Marsh - flooded twice daily by marine waters, vegetation is
predominantly Spartina alterniflora (low marsh cord grass).
Coastal Fresh 1M1arsh - flooded twice daily by low salinity water or fresh
water of the upper tidal limits of an estuary.
Vegetation is predominantly Typha angustifolia
(narrow leaved cattail) and various fresh water
emergents.
High Marsh or Salt Meadow - flooded periodically on "spring" tides which
occur during the two periods of each month when solar
tides and lunar tides are mutually reinforcing.
Vegetation is predominantly Spartina patens (salt hay)
and Distichlis spicata (spike grass).

Extent and Distribution (Long Island). As of 1971 some 21,000 acres of salt
marsh remained in the Long Island counties Nassau and Suffolk. Nine thousand
acres are in Nassau, 12,000 are left in Suffolkd Few marshes remain on the North
Shore west of Dosoris Pond, but from there to Crab Meadow close to nine hundred
acres are distributed in 24 sites. Sunken meadow, the Nissequoque, Stony Brook
Harbor contain large marsh lands. Port Jefferson Harbor and Mt. Sinai Harbors
have small remnants of good wetlands. The 184 acre marsh at Wading River is the
last North Shore marsh before Orient.

From Orient to Montauk around the waters separating the two forks, 55 marsh
sites comprise most of the 3600 acres of wetland remaining in the towns of
Riverhead, Southold, Shelter Island, Southamoton and Easthampton. Few of the
former wetlands remain that once graced ilecox Bay, the coastal ponds or Shinnecock
Bay, but many marshes remain along eoriches and Great South Eays andc the wetlands
from Captree Island to the Lawrence Marshes remain. These wetlands comprise about
15,000 acres in 60 sites.

(Hudson River) Few wetlands exist in the northern fifth of the study area.
The four sections from Schodock light to Barrytown have several wetlands of
importance. Reaches eight through eleven are barren of wetlands, but twelve
through fourteen possess major wetland areas. The southernmost section has no
wetlands.

Ecological Significance - Function. Coastal wetlands serve as essential habitat
for various marine and coastal species. They cleaa certain pollutants from
estuarine waters and they provide the base of the estuarine food chain.

Coastal marshes and estuarine food chains
Smith (1966:217) regards"the estuary, its creeks, sounds, marshes and mudflats
as,..one production unit. "Coastal fresh and marine intertidal marshes are the
most productive of the wetlands.' (Draft for Public Hearing Purposes, 1976).
Tidal action deposits silt, organic and inorganic wastes and dissolved solids
from various sources on the marsh. Plant detritus is carried out on the outgoing
tide to form the base of the estuarine food chain. Because of the richness of
this productive environment, "The marine flora and fauna...of the estuary...
display a greater denisty of individuals...than are found in the open sea."
(New England River Basins Commission, 1975). But wide extremes of salt content
limit the estuarine habitat to relatively few species.

In addition to the role of food factory for the estuary, the intertidal
marsh and coastal fresh marsh tend to purge the estuarine water of nutrient-
pollutants such as sewage and fertilizers in run-off. This action is most effective
in removal of particulate carbons which contribute to the marsh productivity
after being broken (by microorganisms) into assimilable forms for plant uptake.

These marshes also serve as spawning areas and nurseries for marine fishes.
Other animals, especially birds, have evolved to exploit these populations of
small fish. Waterfowl, herons, egrets, bitterns and others use the marsh as
feeding habitat. Some waterfowl nest, all find shelter in the dense marsh grasses.

The high marsh or salt meadow, while slightly less effective than marshes
flooded twice daily, also serves to clean estuarine waters and is regarded as
critically important for estuarine food production (Draft for Public Hearing
Purposes, 1975).

Because they are drier, high marshes are the preferred nesting habitat for
most waterfowl remaining in New York's coastal zone to breed. The high marsh
also supports a greater diversity of mammals and so serves as good hunting
habitat for such raptors as the Marsh Hawk and IRoughlegged Hawk.

The predators form the top of the food chains. At this trophic level the
high marsh and intertidal marsh are inseparable because of movements of prey
species. Predators common to the coastal zone are Osprey, Horned Owl, Marsh
Hawk, Roughlegged Hawk, Short Earred Owl, Fox, Weasel, and Snapping Turtle.

The upland-wetland interface
Both the intertidal marsh and the high marsh buffer adjacent uplands from
the energy of coastal storms. They diminish the extent of flooding and the force
of waves. They may absorb some wind energy also.

Depending on land use, adjacent uplands input to the wetland estuarine system
may be positive or negative. Land in an urbanized state or cultivated may provide
undesirable nutrient loads. Woodlands provide nesting habitat and roosting habitat
for Herons, Egrets, Horned Owls, Osprey and other frequenters of the marsh.

Cultivated land may also provide additional and at times crucial feeding
areas for geese, ducks and shorebirds.

Values. Coastal Marshes are essential to the productivity of estuarine waters
including coastal ponds and embayments. Calories produced on the marsh as plant
material are harvested in the estuary as Scallops, Oysters, Hardclams, Softclams,
Scup, Striped Bass, "Snapper" bluefish or flounder. Those calories may even be
harvested in the open sea as biomass of still larger fish. Marine productivity
is critically dependant on the wetland estuarine systme, for this reason alone
coastal wetlands comprise a critical resource which cannot be allowed to diminish
by a process of slow attrition without resulting in an untenable social loss.

In addition to the values derived from primary production (plant material),
intertidal marshes comprise essential habitat for wildlife. Of obvious value is
habitat for waterfowl, but other wildlife values related to non-consumptive recre-
ational use may exceed the values which are readily identified by the hunter in
monetary outlays or even in terms of "willingness to pay." According to the New
England River Basins Commission (1975), the nonconsumptive users of wildlife
along the Long Island Shore "far outnumber" the consumptive users. But the value
upheld if these users were charged for this experience is presently inaccessible.
There is no market for the resource. It is a public good, therefore values
attributed to the production of this resource, while real, cannot be readily
identified. Expressions of these values often occur as demands for political
action to preserve these wetlands. Most highly prized are marshes which support
a great diversity of wading birds: Herons, Egrets, Bitterns and Shorebirds;
Plover, Sandpipers, Turnstones, knots and Oyster Catchers as well as waterfowl.

Wetlands comprise "natural" open space which, when allowed to exist, enhances
the value of adjacent residential land. This is an important value in highly
urbanized regions and regions under development pressure. Open space enhances
habitat for human dwelling. The costs and benefits ofent, however, don't fall
equitably.

Those who live adjacent to the open space derive benefits for which they
don't pay. This results in impetus for the owner to develop his land. The
values of open space, hence of wetlands as open space, vary with the degree of
existing development and of anticipated development. Some effort should be made
to appraise these values. Such values may elude being adequately translated
into dollars before they have been identified in terms of amenities affecting human
behavior. A congenial environment is conducive to socially responsible behavior.
A discordant environment is disruptive of social behavior.

Permissible Uses-Wetlands. "...whatever the present existing values of a particular
wetland are, the ability of that wetland to serve these values can be substantially
increased if it is allowed to function in a substantially natural and undisturbed
state." (Draft for Public Hearing Purposes, 1975)

Competing land use needs in the coastal zone constitute enormous pressure
for development which would destroy these food production ecosystems. But some
of these needs must be accommodated while others can be satisfied by development

of land removed from the tide water-land interface. To minimize the impact of
development on the wetland-estuary ecosystem, those land uses which do not require
access to tidal waters (such as residential development) should be prohibited in
the near vicinity of coastal wetlands (from 300 feet to 500 feet of high tide).
Other uses, requiring development of the land-water interface, should be located
to avoid impairment of wetland values.

In general, dredging and filling should be avoided. Where it is necessary
for such critical needs as sewage outfall pipelines and underground power
transmission lines, etc., such operations should be accomplished with mitigation
of damages provided on site as well as off site. Spoil, properly managed, can
provide wildlife values such as nest areas for colonially breeding birds, especially
terns and skirmers, and as general habitat for shorebirds. It can be employed
as water control structures to revitalize previously ditched marshes or those
dominated by phrag9ites.

Wetland areas should not be traversed by high tension lines because of
the hazard to avifauna including some rare and endangered species.

Extensive uses such as hunting waterfowl from punts or blinds, trapping
furbearers, harvest of shellfish, crustaceans, and finfish are benign uses of
wetlands. Properly managed, these activities crop the surplus populations without
tmpairing the production of the resource.

Priority Uses - Wetlands.
Wetlands should be regarded as production centers of a food crop harvested
off site. They are as intolerant of human activity as a farm field full of
tomatoes. It is this use, the production of the base of estuarine food chains,
which is the priority use of coastal wetlands. Requiring no input from human
sources, wetlands seem to function best when left entirely alone, although
restoration efforts such as those being explored by Garbidge on Chesapeake
Bay, may yield positive results.

Other uses of wetlands should be gauged carefully to avoid lowering the
vegetative productivity of the wetland.

Category Estuaries and Embayments

Definition. An estuary is the region of a river near the mouth, of varying salinity,
affected by the tides. The uppermost reaches may be entirely fresh. Embayments
are estuarine waters of broad extent which cannot be traced to a single fresh
water source.

Description, Extent and Distribution (Long Island only) Estuaries are usually
thought of as the tidal portions of rivers. Other definitions (Green, 1968)
Day, 1951) omit reference to tides and rely on the concept of varying salinity.
This practice includes as estuaries those bodies of water occasionally shut off
from the sea by longshore drift (considered in this report under the heading
coastal ponds with nonrythiic salt connection) and bays, which cannot be associated
with any particular river.

Estuaries vary in size and shape with the age and size of the river, with
the quantity of longshore drift, and with local geology. Long estuaries develop
in submerged river valleys. Embayments such as Great South Bay may result from
the action of long shore drift merging several estuaries at their mouths.

Long Island's Estuaries can be separated into four major groups, (1) the
North Shore harbors from Little Nceck Bay to lit. Sinai liarbor, (2) the Peconic
Bays, (3) the Coastal Ponds from Ilecox Bay to Fort Pond and (4) the South Shore
Bays from East Bay to Shinnecock. Each o. these groups is characterized by different
geology, size and orientation.

The North Shore harbors and the Nissequoque River are located East of
Miller Place. They are three to ten miles apart, up to five miles long, about one
mile wide, and penetrate southward into the island. Lest of Millers Place
(about the midpoint of the North Shore) the bays cease and the coast becomes
an unbroken line except for ]iattituck Harbor halfway between Miller Place and
Orient.

The Peconic Bays, including Noyack Bay, Gardners Bay and the waters surrounding
Shelter Island comprise a large estuary which splits eastern Long Island lengthwise
from east to west for about thirty miles. This is Long Island's largest estuary
and second in importance only to the Great South Bay. These waters are Long
Island's chief source of Bay Scallops.

The Coastal Ponds are on the south shore of the South Fork. They begin
at Water 'Mill with -Mecox Bay, include Sagaponack Pond, Uainscott Pond, Georgica
Pond and Hook Pond. These are relatively small bodies of water about a mile
long and one quarter mile or less wide. They are centers of waterfowl concentration.

The South Shore Bays beginning with 'Middle Bay extending through South
Oyster Bay, Great South Bay, and Noriches Bay to Shinnecock Bay comprise a system
almost 70 miles long ranging from one to five miles wide. This is the chief
Hard Clam producing area of the world.

Ecological Function. The extremes in salt content typical of estuaries serve
to reduce fish species diversity. Productivity, however, is very high. The
estuary is the second link in the rich salt marsh-marine food chain. Detritus
from the marsh is the fuel for the estuarine food factory. Particles are
colonized by bacteria and fungi, ingested by amphipods, shrimp, copepods, etc.,
stripped of microflora, racolonized, ingested again until after five to seven
such cycles the particle is completely digested (Massman, 1970). Thle motile
organisms of the estuary are essentially marine, able to withstand full seawater.
But with exception of anadromous species they have limited tolerance of fresh-
water and they are distributed along a salinity gradient with younger, smaller
fishes inhabiting increasingly fresher water. Toward freshwater, marine species
drop out but are not replaced by freshwater forms. "Thus the estuary serves as
a sort of marine nursery, a place where young fish and other organisms such as
the blue crab are protected from predators and competing species unable to enter
low salinity water." (Smith, 1966: 213)

The estuarine waters, especially shallows are, in conjunction with their
associated wetlands, essential habitat, providing food, cover and resting space
for waterfowl. On an international scale, such water bodies as Great South
Bay are also properly described by MIassmann's (1970) description of Chesapeake
Bya as a "great winter pasture" for ducks, geese, herons, egrets, loons, grebes
and others.

Values. Estuarine values are manifold. Some are derived from resource congeries
unrelated to biological outputs. Other values derive from an aesthetic regime
which, while not dependent on the biological resource or on natural settings, is
enhanced by those settings in a state of ecological health. Other values hinge
directly on biological outputs of the wetland-estuary ecosystem. These outputs
are the flora and fauna which provide recreational experience and marketable
or potentially marketable food resources.

The values expressed in markets are commercial values. Markets exist for
certain finfish and shellfish. Other fish not now marketed may be needed in the
future and should be regarded as potential food resources. Certain elements
of the recreational experiences drawn from the fishery are also marketable.
These include fishing "party" boats put out for charter or hire.

Much of the value of the recreational experience is not reflected in markets.
The methodology to evaluate this experience is inchoate. Knetsh and Davis (1966)
Krutilla (1967) and Clawson (1959) among others do not attribute to the value of
the recreational resource,expenditures such as purchase of boats, guns, meals,
etc. They maintain that the value of the resource is only equal to the sum of
individuals willingness to pay to experience that recreation or to preserve the
option of experiencing it. Others, represented by Steinhoff (1971) reject this
notion and include expenditures for specialized equipment and clothing, meals,
lodging, etc. purchased to facilitate participation, as part of the cost of
participating and they attribute these expenses to the value of the resource.

Added to that confusion is the incommensurable nature of the value gained
from the recreational experience. Market values and those drawn from inferentially
drawn demand curves Clawson (1959) Knetsch and Davis (1966) reflect a summation
of individuals beliefs concerning maximization of utility. These beliefs are
estimates, attended by a large risk of uncertainty, formed from imperfect knowledge
by elements of a broad population, many of whom seem to exhibit varying degrees
of a desire for self annihilation. Other factors which bias these market values
away from a true estimate of welfare maximization are the efforts of some to
create demand for commodities which,measured against the yardsticks of either
public health or long-run economic stability possess little or negative utility.
More important are short run gains accomplished at long run expense by economically
irreversible resource allocations predicated on these contrived markets. Social
evolution, subject to this pressure tends to generate secondary needs which
conflict with basic needs yet are essential to obtaining those basic needs.
(e.g. The preponderant development of single family housing and the dispersal
of industry and commerce made possible by the automobile have resulted in reliance
on that mode of transportation which wastes enormous quantities of energy and
constitutes a major source of air pollution.)

The estuary, its wetlands, mudflats and tributaries form a unit which
processes light and chemical nutrients to produce a set of biological outputs.
These outputs have intrinsic value to the preservation and maintenance of human
health. But these values are not adequately expressed in markets nor in inferen-
tially drawn demand curves. These outputs include the protein resource of
estuarine fish including oceanic species which use the estuary for spawning or
as a nursery. They include the shellfish resource and the scenic vegetation,
water and open space. The finfish are an exceptionally healthy source of protein
when uncontaminated by toxic wastes. They are also an important recreational
resource. Their value for recreation is enhanced when they are pursued in a
"natural setting." Steinhoff (1971) describes the individual seeking recreational
experience in natural landscapes "as one who scarcely distinguishes re-creation
of mind, spirt and body from the beauty of wildlife and environment which
stimulates pleasure and satisfies artistic hunger." The natural setting of an
undisturbed estuary with its associated wetlands, etc. provides diverse and
numerous flora and fauna with high aesthetic qualities.

Permissible Uses. Estuaries are subject to a variety of conflicting uses. They
are the locus of industrial and commercial activities because of their accessi-
bility to transport. They are a source of aesthetic/re-creational experience and
a source of protein with low fatty acid content. The value of these resources is
often if not universally degraded by the presence of commercial-industrial
activities. Sewage effluents and runoff from urban and agricultural areas also
degrade the natural values of the estuary. Use of estuarine waters to cool
power plants causes thermal loading. These uses of the estuary are necessary
to our present economy but they should be limited to estuaries where natural
values are already severly degraded. They should not be expanded into areas
retaining an aesthetic character and good biological productivity. The permissible

uses for such natural and semi-natural areas are sport and commercial harvest
of fish, hunting, sailing, swimming and other boating activities. Priority
among these uses should be given to uses which do not degrade the aesthetic
environment or the sustained yield of the fishery.

Category Coastal Ponds with nonrythmic salt connection

Definition. Coastal Ponds with nonrythmic salt connection, differentiated from
salt pannes, are embayments with a fresh water source and an intermittent salt
water exchange which occurs nonperiodically. Technically, these coastal ponds
are estuaries (Green, 1968:4).

)escription. These ponds lie very close to tidal waters. They are separated
from them only by a narrow beach. The fresh source dominates the landward portion
of such waters. Toward the beach, the water becomes brackish. There is no
natural permanent connection to salt water, but occasionally, especially following
periods of heavy rain, the pond will break through the beach, establishing a
link with tidal salt water. These temporary links may also result from wave
action during coastal storms. Unless artifically maintained these breaches will
soon be mended by longshore transport of sand. Then the pond begins to freshen
again.

Ecological relationships. As in estuaries, the vegetation stratifies according
to salinity. Fresh water emergents dominate the landward shores. But in the
seaward portions, those areas of estuaries normally occupied by halophytes, only
euryhaline species arc found. The halophytes cannot withstand the reduced salinity
accompanying the loss of the tidal connection. The few species such as Oysters,
widgeon grass, silver sides and white perch which do occur here thrive with the
lack of competition and parasitism.

The widgeon grass is particularly attractive to waterfowl, especially redheads,
canvasbacks and other divers.

Values. The coastal ponds are among the most important winter haven's for waterfowl
on Long Island. They are preferred because of the thick crop of Ruppia maratime
or Widgeon grass supported by these waters of variable salinity. They are also
producers of oysters and forage fish. They consitute an esthetic resource and
provide sport hunting and fishing and harvest of shellfish. The large ponds are
suitable for dinghy class sailing craft and hand powered small boats.

Permissible uses. The Littoral Zone and the marsh are as important to these
coastal ponds as they are to estuaries. Whatever use is made of these areas,
it should never compromise the plant species which are responsible for the
considerable fish and wildlife values realized in these ponds. Land use controls
in adjacent areas should prevent contamination of these waters with toxic sub-
stances and microorganisms or nutrient overloads. It should preserve areas of
Spartina marsh and protect the littoral zone from dreging and spoil deposition.
Suggested uses are non-motorized recreational boating, fishing, hunting, trapping
and nature study. Commercial harvest of shellfish is also practible.

Category Tidal Mudflats

Definition Mudflats are shoal areas of muck bottom periodically covered and uncovered
by tidal action.

Description Mudflats are unvegetated muck bottom areas exposed at low tides.

Extent and Distribution (Long Island) Mudflats known to be important to wildlife
are found in nine locations on the North Shore. Two are in Bayville, one in Lloyd
Harbor, one in Huntington. There is one associated with the :issequoque and one
area in Stony Brook Harbor. All of Conscience Bay is a mudflat. The forks are
rather devoid of mudflats, although some are present in the Mattituck Quadrangles,
they are not of known significance to wildlife. Important areas are found at
Moriches Inlet, and along Shinnecock Bay. The western part of Great South Bay
to Lawrence is the area where most of the important mudflats are located.

Hudson River - Extensive mudflats occur in reaches four through six. There
are almost no mudflats in the first three reaches below Troy Dam. The remaining
reaches each have a few which range from very important (reach 14) to fringe areas.

Ecological Function - Mudflats are areas inhabited by mollusks and worms. They
are extensively used for feeding by birds and fish. In some areas mudflats may be
critical to the continued presence of wildlife in an area because they provide the
major food resources for the animals.

Value - Mudflats are valued as essential habitat for migrating and indigneous
avifauna. They may also be important feeding areas for fish when flooded by the
tide.

Permissible Uses - Any use which doesn't destroy the shallow area, change the
bottom or cause such pollution of the water that results in death of the organisms
that live in the mud, is permissible.

Priority use - food source for fish and wildlife species.

Category Littoral zones

Definition The littoral zone extends from the intersection of the compensation
layer (the depth at which respiration equals photosynthesis) and the bottom to
the shore. i'he actual depth of the compensation layer is determined by turbidity
of the water; however the New York Tidal Wetlands Lawy only recognizes littoral
zones in less than 12 feet of water.

Description Littoral zones are the shallow waters in which rooted plants can
live. The width depends on slope of the bottom and water turbidity.

Extent and distributions Long Island. Littoral zones fringe all but bulkheaded
shorelines where the fill extends below the compensation layer. On the north shore,
littoral zones extend to one quarter mile from the shore into Long Island Sound.
The landward half of each harbor is almost entirely littoral. Extensive littoral
zones are found in the bays separating the east-end forks. Flanders Bay is
entirely littoral and large extents of littoral zone are found at Shelter Island
and Gardiner's Island. On the south shore, the bays separating the barrier beach
and the mainland comprise the largest littoral zones of Long Island.

Hudson River Only small amounts of littoral zone are present in the northern
three reaches. Reaches five through eight have extensive littoral zones as do
reaches eleven, twelve and fourteen.

Ecological Function "Some ... littoral zones are areas of extremely high
biological productivity and are nearly or equally as important in this regard
as intertidal marshes and coastal fresh marshes. Even in relatively ufproductive
areas other values are often present and these areas often have the potential
to become more biologically productive in the future." Draft for Public Hearing
Purposes 1976 . Littoral zones provide shelter, food, and spawning areas for
fish. They provide food for waterfowl and a nutrient trap for polluted water.

Values In value, the littoral zone is a submerged equivalent of the low marsh.
It is an essential habitat for several fish species. It is said to be important
in buffering the land against the energy of storm waves (Draft for Public Hearing
Purposes 1976: 4). The biota tends to clean pollutants from the waters and
channel excess nutrients into aquatic food chains.

Permissible uses. Littoral zones may be used for fish harvest, aquaculture and
recreation. Any use of littoral zones should avoid dredging or shading. Effluents
should not be dumped directly into littoral zones without high levels of treatment.

Priority Use - wildlife - as natural habitat for fish.

Category Deep Water Habitats

Definition waters in excess of 50 foot deep

Description, Ecological Function and Extent This is an inventory item not used
on Long Island. It is habitat for sturgeon in the Hudson River. The major deep-
water habitats are found in reaches six through eight and in reach thirteen. The
northern most three reaches have no deepwater habitat. Small areas are found in
reaches twelve, fourteen and fifteen.

Value Habitat for an endangered species. This species has commercial value.

Permissible Uses Transportation and recreational uses are permissible but strong
effort should be made to avoid pollution of the habitat. If the species can be
restored there is a commercial. market for the roe.

Category Shellfish Beds

Definition Shellfish beds are submerged or intertidal areas inhabited by commercially
important shellfish. Some areas are now closed to harvest because of pollution.

Description The principle shellfish of commercial importance are Hard Clams, Soft
Clams, Bay Scallops and Oysters. They are found from the intertidal zone to depths
of forty feet. Some species survive below this depth but their growth is severely
inhibited.

Extent and distribution (Long Island onlv) The north shore harbors, especially
Oyster Bay, are particulary noted for Oyster production. Oysters are also produced
near Greenport and to a lesser extent in some of the other waters separating the
two "forks." In these waters, from Flanders Bay to Block Island sound the primary
resource is the Bay Scallop, although both hard and soft clams are also produced.
Oysters and clams are found in the "coastal ponds" of the south fork. The waters
separating the south shore from the barrier beach are known as the "worlds out-
standing hard clam factory" (A.S. Taormina, pers com). Here, in scattered mud flats,
soft clams are also found.

Ecological Function Shellfish are members of the benthic community but the four
species considered here each function differently. Scallops and oysters are members
of the epibenthos. The clams are part of the infauna. (Green, 1968:153) Smith
(1.966:214) regards "the oyster bed and the oyster reef" as the "outstanding
communities of the estuary. Oysters may be attached on every hard object in the
intertidal zone or they may form reefs, areas where clusters of living--oysters
grow cemented to the almost burried shells of past generations. Oyster reefs
usually lie at right angles to tidal currents which bring planktonic food, carry
away wastes, and sweep the oysters clean of sediment and debris." He lists
several associated organisms including "sponges barnacles, bryoza:-s oyster crabs,
snails, polychaete worms, decapods and pelecypods. Some people believe that oysters
are responsible for limited purefication of polluted waters. Oysters seem to
utilize some bacteria as food and they collect heavy metals in their tissues.
Oysters functioning in such a role must be regarded as unfit for human consumption.

Clams are also filter filters. They are known to use flagellates and other
planktonic forms including various larvae. But unlike oysters, clams burrow into
mud. Soft shell clams may burrow two feet. Hard clams to four inches.

Values Shellfish are an important commercial resource on Long Island. The market
for these meats is expanding. This is a source of protein which although amenable
to cultivation can be harvested directly - it is available at the lowering of a
dredge. Far less resources need be expended to put an ounce of shell fish protein
on the table than to produce an ounce of beef protein.

Permissible uses Shellfish beds should be regarded as valuable resources and
treated accordingly. Markets should be developed to support maximum sustainable
harvest. Although shellfish removed from polluted waters seem able to purge
themselves of some disease organisms; viruses, heavy metals and organic toxicants
remain a problem. Uses which cause pollution should be carefully controlled to
prevent uptake of toxicants or disease organisms which can not be purged by the
shellfish upon transplant to clean water or which might result in the death of
the shellfish. Many such uses occur in sites well removed from the coast on
fresh water streams.

Priority Use Harvest of the protein resource.

0
Category Fish and Wildlife concentration areas

Definition Concentration areas are geographic areas in which wildlife or fish
aggregate for some resource or purpose during some period each year.

Description Concentration areas can only be described according to the species and
purpose which promulgates the concentrations. On Long Island eight types of con-
centration areas included two types of waterfowl areas, diving duck and puddle duck,
Tern and Hern rookeries, fish concentrations, shorebird concentrations, Bank Swallow
colonies and gull colonies. Geese were included with puddle ducks.

Extont and distribution

1. Diving Duck concentrations are found on the waters of the North Shore
harbors to Stony Brook. They are particularly notable from Little Neck Bay to
Hempstead Harbor. Other concentrations occur in Long Island Sound from Rocky
Point east to Jacobs Point and from Horton Point to Orient. Concentrations of
Diving Ducks are also found on both sides of Fire Island Barrier Beach, in Moriches
Bay, in Shinnecock Bay and in the Peconic Bays. But the north shore concentrations
are the most notable.

2. Puddle ducks tend to concentrate at sources of fresh water or in and along
marshes where salinity is down. Spectacular concentrations of geese and puddle
ducks occur on several city park ponds. Six of these occur on the north shore from
Flushing and Shoreham. Ten occur on the north fork, twenty on the south fork on
the Coastal Ponds and in marshes, and eleven are on the South shore from Lynbrook
to Bellport. -.

3. Eleven fish concentration areas were reported for all of Long Island. The
completeness of this information is questionable. The eleven areas are almost
uniformly distributed.

4. Tern rookeries Seven major tern rookeries are found from Lloyd Harbor to
Port Jefferson. Five are on the North fork adjacent to the waters of the Peconic
Bays. Two are on Plum Island, Five are on Gardiners Island. Two are on Shinnecock
Bay, one is on Moriches Bay and three are near Bay Shore on Great South Bay. Terns
are a threatened species.

5. Shore bird concentrations The only concentration area of shorebirds on
the north shore is in the St. James quadrangle. On the north fork, one is found in
Southold and two are in Orient. Two very good areas, farmers fields used for feeding
are in the town of Easthampton. On the south shore, west of Moriches, shore bird
concentrations occur on Cedar Island, on Oak Beach Marsh, and on North, Middle and
South Line Islands. South Line Island is reputed to have the most diverse and
plentiful shorebird concentrations on Long Island.

6. Wading Bird Concentrations (Heron Rookeries) Herons concentrate in the
same marshes and mudflats that produce concentraions of terns, shorebirds and
waterfowl. Separate aggregations of these birds occur on-Plum Island, Gardiners
*s Island and Robins Island, and on the Lawrence marshes, in the marshes near Jones
Inlet and on Seganic Island. The largest concentrations in 1975 occurred in the
Lawrence Marshes.

7. Hawk Migrations The barrier beach and south shore of the south fork are
a concentration are of migrating hawks in the fall.

8. Gulls Large gull concentrations occur at Jones Beach, on Gardiners Island
and on Plum Island.

Hudson River Wildlife concentrations occur in each of the fifteen reaches, but the
south most five (the lower third of the study area) seems to have the greatest
number of all types.

1. Waterfowl concentrations occur in reaches one, three, five, six, seven,
nine through eleven and most notably in reaches thirteen and fourteen.

2. Fish concentrations occur in each reach but the ninth.

3. Shorebird concentration is found only in reach three.

4. A hawk migration crossing point is in reach twelve.

Ecological Function Seasonal migrations funnel large numbers of animals from
diverse regions into relatively small areas. Concentrations occur where the
habitat requirements of a gregarious species are easily met within the confines
of a small area. But concentrations also occur where an area of limited extent
is one of few or the sole source of a necessary resource. Concentrations of
wildlife and fish should be seen as resource bottlenecks and regarded as critical
resource areas for the species involved except as may be proven otherwise on a
case by case basis. eg some species behavior is largely influenced bf-'tradition?
(Hochbaum, 1955) and loss of a single resource area used by such animals may be
ameliorated by providing a like resource base in another locale close by.

Values The values of concentration areas derive from their inate ability to
concentrate wildlife, making the resource accessible to people and more importantly
from the value of such areas to each species concerned. To the degree that the
species involved depend on the area, the areas value equals the value of the species
or the numbers of individuals supported.

Permissible Uses Concentration areas should be managed to continue to provide
the resources for which wildlife or fish concentrate there to find. Within that
stricture, they may also be managed to provide levels of recreational use of the
wildlife resource which will not compromise the quality of the environment during
the season(s) of concentration.

Category: (locally) Unique Ecological Areas

Definition: Unique ecological areas are those especially valued for some quality
of uniqueness, for the presence of unusual flora or fauna or for a quality of
wildness representative of the area prior to the impact of mechanized man.

Description: varies with site.

Ecological Function: varies with site.

Extent and Distribution: (Long Island) There are 25 separate areas on Long Island,
which for various reasons merit use of the term unique. Three are on the North
Shore. Nine including Gardiners Island and Plum Island on the forks or the waters
near them. Ten such areas are found along the barrier beach and three are city
parks between Bellmore and Babylon.

Index to unique ecological areas mapped in Areas of particular concern to the
preservation and maintenance of fish and wildlife populations in the coastal
zone of Long Island:

Name, or description of area Page Includes areas numbered

Caumsett State Park and Target 49 4a, 5, 6, 8, 18a, 18, 19,
Rock Refuge 51 10, 11, 20
Ravine and ponds south of Cold 53 3, 6-9 _.
Spring Harbor
.issequoque River 8& la, lb, 3
Mattituck Hills 129,131 1
Bluffs southwest Mattituck Hills 133 9
Flanders Marshes and associated 137,139 1,2
uplands to water divide
Moores drain 151 2
Dune Community 153 3
Robins Island Marsh and Ponds 157 1,2
Long Beach 183 1, la, 2, 3
lashamack 187 1,2,6
Plum Island 199 1-4
Gardiners Island 205,219,233 Entire Island
Migrating Sand Dunes 225 24
Hither Hills 225,235 23 8(on page 235)
Dune community 227 2
L!ontauk Point 237,239 8
Marshes east of Lawrence to Jones 249,251, All marshes islands between
Inlet 261,263,265,267 Barrier Beach and South Shore
Connetquot St. Park 299 1-9
Sunken Forest 321 5a
Moriches Flats 347 1,2,4a

Hudson River Unique Ecological Areas are recognized in all reaches but the
northernmost. Several readhes are cited with at least two such areas. In every
instance but one, areas were cited either because of or as having at least one
rare, threatened or endangered species present.

Values Although each exceptional community or unique area will probably possess
unique values, certain generizations are appropriate. Unusual and disappearing
representative habitats possess a museum value that increases with rarity. This
is analogous to some values associated with rare, threatened and endangered species
habitats. These values are different from, but related to what Weisbrod 1964
terms "option demand." Essentially these values consist of the collective willing-
ness to pay for preservation of the option of having what is rare, available for
use. This almost always entails non-consumtive use and often the "use" consists
of nothing more than knowledge of the items continued existence.

Productive habitats are valued also according to the consumable resource
produced as well as the aesthetic or non-consumable aspects of the habitat.

Further values relate to the contribution each area makes toward biological
integrity or ecological stability. Individually each area is small in this regard
but cumulative values are very high. Human survival may ultimately hinge on
efforts to maintain ecological stability. Odum (1969) suggested partitioning the
landscape into environmental classes including a maintenance or "protection" class.
The unique community would be a logical first candidate for such protection.

Permissible Uses Any use commensurate with the resource values invol76d is
permissible. Planners involved in development of areas containing exceptional
biological communities should consult with the appropriate Department of Environmental
Conservation Resource Managers to determine the degree of fragility of such environ-
ments and develop their plan accordingly. In general, only cxtensive uses such as
nature trails, hunting and fishing should be permitted in such areas and such use
should always be directed around fragile areas.

Fragile or key areas of exceptional communities may require some effort on
the part of planners to discover. The information required should be obtainable
from the Department of Environmental Conservation from the local Audubon Societies
or from the Lature Conscrvancy.

Category Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species Habitats

Definition Habitats for rare, threatened or endangered species are the geographic
areas in which such animals are now located and satisfactorily sustaining themselves.
This may also include areas where species are declining if the decline is due to
external influences and not to natural successional changes. Even those areas may
be included if they are amenable to management to maintain the species in question.
The concepts of rare or threatened and endangered is applied to the local and
regional level.

Description, Extent and Distribution - Habitats were identified for Osprey, Terns,
Piping Plover, Black Rail, Oyster catcher, Bald Eagle, Snowy Owl, Bank Swallows,
Golden Plover, Wood Frogs, and Salamanders.

Osprey Habitats are associated with nest sites. The osprey requires a source
of fish uncontaminated by halogenated hydrocarbons. The nest site and the waters
near it comprise the habitat. Osprey nests have not been found west of the single
nest in Connetquot State Park. Nests are found on Robins Island, on the Peconic
shores of the South fork, on Gardiners Island and on Plum Island. Five nests on
Fishers Island indicate a tolerance of human proximity. The critical factor for
Osprey is an uncontaminated and sufficient food source.

Terns require a sandy beach isolated from sources of nest depredations by
human traffic, rats and dogs. They are colonial ground nesters and fish eaters.
Piping Plover also require a sandy nest area, and are often found with terns but
they are not colonial. The entire barrier beach and south shore of the south fork
are potential Piping Plover nesting habitat. Seven tern colonies are distributed
from Lloyd Point to Conscience Bay on the north shore and 5 along the shores of the
Peconic Bays on the north fork. There are two tern rookeries on Plum Island, five
on Gardiners Island, two on Shinnecock Bay, one on Moriches Bay and three near
Bay Shore on Great South Bay. To maintain tern populations, unvegetated sandy areas
protected from trampling and depredations must be provided. Existing rookery sites
need not be inviolably preserved but equivalent sites should be located close by
prior to nesting season before development intrudes on a tern rookery.

Black Rails are very uncommon on Long Island. The only known nest site is
in Oak Beach Marsh.

King Rail is also limited to one site on Long Island. This is on the Lawrence
Marshes.

Oyster catchers, unusual on Long Island, are not an endangered species. They
are expanding their range. Oyster catchers are found at Lloyd Point, on the north
shore, along the Flanders marshes near Riverhead, along Shinnecock Bay, Long Beach
at Orient State Park on Gardiners Island on Three Mile Harbor in Easthampton, and
at Accohonack Harbor. Gardiner'sIsland with some six pairs is the center for
Oyster Catchers on Long Island.

Bald Eagle - One Bald Eagle wintering area is known at Heckler State Park;
occasionally an eagle may be seen at Connetquot State Park.

Snowy Owls use the South Shore Barrier Beaches in winter.

Bank Swallows occur in colonies in high bluffs. They are found only on Eastern
Long Island. Colonies exist near Mattituck inlet on Long Island Sound, Gardiners
Island, Robins Island and on Montauk Point.

Golden Plover are unusual migrants found amound shorekind concentrations at
Orient, East Hampton Sag Harbor and on the Barris Beach near Moriches inlet. Other
shorebirds also seen less regularly at these and other shorebird locations (see
index) L.I, report) are willet, black bellied plover and yellow legs.

Herps are scarce but coming back on Long Island following the cessation of
spraying of DDT for mosquito control. Salanenders and wood frogs, Fowlers Toad
and others are maintaining or slowly expanding populations.

Salamanders are found at one location in Glen Cove, one at Cove neck, two
south of Cold Spring Harbor, several locations near Riverhead, and near the
Maple Swamp-Sears Bellows Pond area north of Flanders Marshes South East of River-
head. They are found in MooresDrain in Southold and on Garciners Island, on Shelter
Island and in an area north of Yaphank west of Win. Floyd Parkway and south of
Long Wood road.

Wood frogs were reported only near Oyster Bay Cove and Cove Neck.

Areas containing rare, endangered or threatened species were lumped under the
ageis of Unique Ecological Areas in the Hudson River study.

Ecological Function Varies with species but in general, this relates to species
diversity and maintenance of balanced stable populations. The more diverse the
pathways through which energy can be funneled, the more stable the biological system.

Values The value of habitat supporting rare or endangered species is enhanced by
the willingness of people to pay for support of such species. No market for this
exists; but the values are expressed as political action protecting such habitats,
and by purchase of such areas by interest groups dedicated to saving such species.

This value is added to values of compatible uses of these areas such as
open space preservation, general wildlife habitat, over extensive areas, hunting,
nature interpretation, selective timber cutting, etc.

Permissible Uses Use varies with the species concerned. These habitats should not
be disturbed.during breeding season. Animals upset by human presence such as bald
eagle require isolation while habitats for salamanders, wood frogs and bog turtles
require only management to prevent predation or loss of habitat. Other animals
such as terns and piping plover are more amenable to mitigation. Dredge spoil
islands create excellent nesting habitat for terns.

Category Urban Open Space suitable as wildlife habitat

Definition Wetlands, Lakes, Streams their banks and shorelands or uplands vegetated
at least by shrubs and grasses and no smaller than five acres; within the confines
of an urban area with population at least 10,000.

Description, Extent and Distribution - Long Island These are green areas within
the expanse of brick, concrete and macadam which constitute the urban habitac )i
man. Wildlife habitat requires some minimum of an unbroken vegetated area. Feral
animals and animals thriving in the presence of human commerce and dwelling such
as pigeons, rats, starlings and cockroaches are not considered wildlife in the
context of this report. The urban area of Long Island extends on the north shore,
east to Northport and on the south shore,east to Patchoque. On the south shore
the open areas suitable as wildlife habitat are usually town parks, and on the
edge of residential areas, the bays and marshes between the barrier beach and the
mainland. On the North shore a more affluent population has created large estates
from Little Neck Bay to San Remo on the Nissequoque. These estates contribute
significantly to wildlife habitats.

Hudson River Reaches one and two, six through eight, ten and eleven and thirteen
have some areas designated as urban open space suitable as wildlife habitat.

Ecological Function The North Shore area of large estates provides large areas
of low human density which support various levels of wildlife populations according
to the vegetation allowed to grow. Managed for optimum wildlife support with
coexisting human settlement, these areas could sustain a rich and varied wildlife
resource. The south shore areas function as concentration areas for waterfowl in
winter.

Values Aldo Leopold (1943) asserted: "... by common consent of thinking people,
there are cultural values in experiences which renew contacts with wild things."
He identifies three of these values:

"1. split rail value - historical appreciation"
"2. testimony to human dependance on food chains"
"3. advancement toward a conservation ethic"

Cultures, like species, evolve and survive or they become ill-fitted to the
environment from which they draw operational resources. Ill-fitted cultures,
unable to interact effectively with the resource base fail to sustain themselves
and they disappear.

Leopold in 1943, sensed that mans ignorant use of machinery was modifying the
environment toward irreversible depletions of resources critical to our well-being.
He stated (1943) "We shall achieve conservation when and only when the destructive
use of land becomes unethical-punishible by social ostracism. Any experience that
stimulates this extension of ethics is culturally valuable."

Leopold saw the wildlife experience as adding survival value to our culture,
through an educative process. lie perceived that an individual accrues values from
an interaction with wildlife which stimulate a desire to preserve 'the opportunity
to enjoy similar experiences in the future. He obviously felt that once developed,
this "conservation ethic" would logically extend to promote careful use of land,
soil, water, air and non-renewable fuel sources.

The values gained by the individual from such aesthetic experiences are held
to be self-renewal, a withdrawal from the tensions inherent in the day to day
existence of urban dwellers, resulting in increased competency or ability to cope.
This adds further survival value to the culture which preserves and encourages these
opportunities.

Permissible Uses

Urban open space is an increasingly precious commodity. It is desired for
playgrounds, ball parks, commercial and residential development. Areas that
sustain wildlife populations should be held in land uses which can provide wildlife
experiences to urban people. Nature trails through appropriately managed preserves
is the priority use. On Long Islands north shore large estates now holding
substantial wildlife populations may be taxed out of existence. These areas could
be managed to hold even more diverse and plentiful fauna. Regional government
should seek to alleviate the tax burdens of t!mae estates in exchange for certain
of the property rights. Development rights and certain tresspass rights should
be acquired by government-in exchange for lowered taxes.

PART 661

TIDAL WETLANDS - LAND USE REGULATIONS
(Statutory authority: Environmental Conservation Law
��1-0101, 3-0301 and 25-0302)

Sec.
661.1 Purpose of this Part
661.2 Findings
661.3 Applicability
661.4 Definitions
661.5 Use guidelines
661.6 Development restrictions
661.7 Uses no: requiring a permit or notification letter
approval
661.8 Notification letter requirements
661.9 Permit requirements
661.10 Standards for issuance of permits
661.11 Conditions to a permit
661.12 Existing land use and development
66i.13 Variances
661.14 Notification letter procedures
661.15 Application for a permit
661.16 Notice of hearing
661.17 Statements by public
661.18 Public hearing; decisions after public hearing;
decisions without public hearings
661.19 Notice of decision to grant or deny permit application
661.20 Relationship to SEQR and the Freshwater Wetlands
Act
661.21 Pending moratorium permit applications
661.22 Duration of permits
661.23 Bond
661.24 Modification of permits and decisions
661.25 Revocation or suspension of permit
661.26 Determination that lands do not involve littoral
zone or coastal shoals, bars or flats
661.27 Inventory map: maintenance and amendments
661.28 Measurement
661.29 Tax assessment
661.30 Joint proceedings under other laws and regulations
661.31 Other laws and regulations; other permits or
approvals
661.32 Emergency activities
661.33 Jurisdictional inquiries
661.34 Violations; penalties
661.35 Enforcement
661.36 Judicial review

6 NYCRR 661
November 10, 1976
CAT~i Z p,!E

661. 1
661. 2

Section 661.1 Purpose of this Part. It is the public

policy of the State, as set forth in the Tidal Wetlands Act,

to preserve and protect tidal wetlands, and to prevent their

* ~despoliation and destruction, giving due consideration to
the reasonable economic and social development of the

State. It is the purpose of this Part to implement that

policy by establishing regulations that allow only those

uses of tidal wetlands and areas adjacent thereto that are

compatible with the preservation, protection and enhancement

of the present and potential values of tidal wetlands,

(including but not limited to their value for marine food

production, wildlife habitat, flood and hurricane and storm

control, recreation, cleansing ecosystems, absorption of

silt and organic material, education and research, and open

space and aesthetic appreciation), that will protect the

public health and welfare, and that will be consistent with

the reasonable economic and social development of the state.

Section 661.2 Findings.

Tidal wetlands constitute one of the most vital and

productive areas of the natural world and collectively have

many values. These values include, but are not limited to,

marine food production, wildlife habitat, flood and storm

and hurricane control, recreation, cleansing ecosystems,

sedimentation control, education and research, and open

661. 2

space and aesthetic appreciation, as set forth in the legis-

0 ~~lative findings contained in section one of chapter 790 of

the laws of 1973. Therefore, the protection and preserva-

tion of tidal wetlands are essential.

Several ecological zones exist in tidal wetlands.

These several zones are as follows: coastal fresh marsh;

intertidal marsh; coastal shoals, bars and flats; littoral

zone; high marsh or salt meadow; and formerly connected

tidal wetlands. In addition, adjacent areas, which are

important to the protection of tidal wetlands values, adjoin

these tidal wetlands zones.

These tidal wetlands zones collectively serve all of

the tidal wetland values set forth in chapter 790 of the

laws of 1973. However, because of their different natural

characteristics, each zone may serve any particular value to

a greater or lesser degree than other zones. The varied

natural characteristics of the several tidal wetlands zones,

including their functions, contour, biota, tidal action,

water quality and in particular their respective contri-

butions to the marine food chain, cause certain zones to be

relatively more sensitive to the adverse impacts caused by

land use and development. Similarly, these varied natural

characteristics make it important to more stringently

* ~~protect and preserve certain tidal wetlands zones relative

to other zones. However, any ranking of the value of dif-

661.2

-3-

ferent tidal wetland zones is general in nature, and specific

exceptions to such a ranking do occur.

Intertidal marsh and coastal fresh marsh tidal wetlands

are the most biologically productive of all tidal wetlands

areas. Furthermore, since they receive twice-daily tidal

flushing, the products of vegetative photosynthetic activity

and decomposition in these zones are readily transported to

adjacent waters for use in the estuarine food chain. Their

intertidal location also makes them among the most effective

wetland zones for flood and hurricane and storm protection.

Both their intertidal location and their highly productive

nature makes them among the most effective wetland zones for

cleansing ecosystems and for absorbing silt and organic

material. Because of these high values and their sensitive

location at the land-water interface, intertidal and coastal

fresh marshes must be the most stringently protected and

preserved tidal wetlands zones. Even small portions of

these zones are critically important resources. Consequently,

only very limited types of land use and development are

compatible with the values of these areas.

Coastal shoals, bars, and flats and littoral zones

include areas of extreme variability in their contributions

to marine food production and other tidal wetland values,

and each such area requires a specific assessment of tidal

wetland values. Some coastal shoals, bars and flats and

661. 2

-4-

some littoral zones are areas of extremely high biological

0 ~productivity and are nearly or equally as important in this

respect as intertidal marshes and coastal fresh marshes.

Other areas are of little biological significance. Even in

these relatively unproductive areas, however, values other
than marine food production are often present, and these

areas often have the potential to become more biologically

productive in the future. Because of their location at the

land-water interface, coastal shoals, bars and flats and

littoral zones play an important role in flood and hurricane

and storm control, although they are less important in this

regard than coastal fresh marshes, intertidal marshes and

hig~h marshes or salt meadows. Similarly, because of their

location at the land-water interface and because of their

generally high levels of productivity, these areas have an

important function in cleansing ecosystems and absorbing

silt and organic materials, but they are also less critical

in these ways than coastal fresh marshes, intertidal marshes

and high marshes or salt meadows. Where tidal wetlands

values, particularly biologic productivity, are high, only

limited types of land use and development are compatible

with the values of these areas. Where tidal wetland values

are relatively lower, more extentive and intensive uses may

be compatible with the wetland values of these areas.

661. 2

-5 -

Some areas possess the physical characteristics of

littoral zones or coastal shoals, bars or flats but do not

function biologically as tidal wetlands. Such areas have

* ~generally been heavily impacted by pollution, sedimentation

or other artificial disturbance, exhibit little primary

productivity, and are populated by few benthic organisms.

Such areas require identification on a case-by-case basis

and when so identified should no longer be treated as tidal

wetlands under this Part.

High marsh or salt meadow tidal wetlands constitute an

extensive zone of the salt marshes that receives only occasional

tidal flooding coincident with extreme lunar tides and

occasional storms. Since their photosynthetic productivity

is lower than coastal fresh marshes and intertidal marshes

and since flushing of the biological products of the high

marsh or salt meadow to the estuary is less efficient than

in coastal fresh marshes and intertidal marshes, salt

meadows or high marshes, while critically important for

marine food production, are slightly less important in this

regard than coastal fresh marshes or intertidal marshes.

Because of their size and location salt meadows or high

marshes are as important for absorption of silt and organic

material and flood and hurricane and storm control as coastal

fresh marshes and intertidal marshes. Furthermore, because

they are located generally in such a way that they are the

661. 2

-6 -

first tidal wetland area to receive run-off and other

0 ~~materials from the land, they have an important role in

cleansing ecosystems, but their value in this respect is

generally slightly less than in coastal fresh marshes and

intertidal marshes because of the lower level of direct

tidal influence in high marshes or salt meadows. Because

these wetlands are usually located adjacent to intertidal

marshes and because their values are similar, these wetland

areas must be stringently protected and preserved. Even

small portions of these areas are critically important

resources, although slightly less so than intertidal marshes

and coastal fresh marshes. Consequently, only very limited

types of land use and development are compatible with the

value of these areas.

All of the above-described tidal wetland zones may

occur behind shifting natural barriers that are breached by

intermittent tidal inlets which allow tidal action to affect

such wetlands.

Formerly connected tidal wetlands are lowland areas

whose connections to tidal waters are restricted by road

fills, dikes, or other man-made facilities. The nature and

value of these tidal wetland areas are widely variable and

are a function of the extent of the tidal restriction and

* ~~the tine which has passed since the restriction occurred.

Therefore, a case-by-case analysis of these wetlands is

661.2

-7-

required. Each of these tidal wetland areas closely resembles

another type of wetland zone. Those uses compatible with

the type of wetland zone which a particular formerly connected

tidal wetland most closely resembles will be generally

compatible with that formerly connected wetland.

Adjacent areas make insignificant contributions to

marine food production. Tidal wetland values for cleansing

ecosystems, flood and hurricane and storm control, and

absorbing silt and organic material may be served to varying

degrees by these areas, but these values are not as criti-

cally served in adjacent areas as in the tidal wetland

zones. The most important function of adjacent areas is to

serve as buffers to protect the character, quality and

values of tidal wetlands that adjoin or lie near these

areas. Consequently, a wide variety of uses may be uom-

Patible with these areas, provided such uses do not adversely

affect adjacent and nearby tidal wetlands.

All of the tidal wetland zones and adjacent areas

generally serve to an approximately equal degree the wildlife

habitat, recreation, education and research, and open space

and aesthetic appreciation values of tidal wetlands. Varia-

tions do occur in the values served from, for example, a

particular intertidal marsh to another or from a particular

high marsh or salt meadow to another. Furthermore, one type

of tidal wetland or an adjaceat area may jerve a particular

661. 2

wildlife habitat, recreation, education and research, or

open space and aesthetic appreciation value. These varia-

tions depend on a wide variety of factors, including the

* ~particular value sought to be served, the quality and

diversity of the natural resources of a particular area, the

size and location of the area, the natural features and land

uses surroun~ding the particular area, and the time of year.

Generally, tidal wetlands an~d adjacent areas are the habitat

for a large number of wildlife species, provide large expanses

for a variety of recreational purposes, offer conditions

useful for many education and research purposes and satisfy

a broad spectrum of aesthetic appreciation and open space

needs.

The productivity and variability of tidal wetlands and

their location in a constantly changing environment mean

that whatever the present existing values of a particular

tidal wetland are, the ability of that wetland to serve

these values generally continues provided it is allowed to

function in a substantially natural and undisturbed state.

Furthermore certain human-induced modifications of tidal

wetlands can increase tidal wetland values when carefully

designed and undertaken. Consequently, land use and develop-

ment in or near tidal wetlands must be compatible with the

present and potential values of tidal wetlands.

661.2

-9-

Tidal wetlan~ds are located at the critical interface

0 ~~between land an~d tidal waters, and the amount of this land-

water boundary is limited. Certain types of lan~d use and

development require access to tidal waters, while others do

not. Given the critical values served by tidal wetlands,

the limited extent of the land-water boundary, and the many

types of land use and development that require water access

and should be located where they will not substantially

impair tidal wetland values, land use and development that

does not require water access generally should not be

located in tidal wetlands or adjacent areas.

While tidal wetlands and adjacent areas contain dis-

tinct zones, as set forth in these findings, these areas are

essentially an integrated natural system. The resources in

one area utilize and depend on the resources in other areas.

The tidal wetland benefits produced in one area benefit

nearby areas, and the negative impacts imposed on the

natural values of one area are transferred to other nearby

tidal wetland areas. Consequently, land use and development

occurring in any particular tidal wetland or adjacent area

may cause impacts on nearby areas and should be compatible

with the values of the particular area on which it is

located as well as with the values of nearby tidal wetlands.

661. 3
661.4

-Io-

Section 661.3 Applicability

This Part shall apply to any tidal wetland the final

bounds of which have been established by an order of the

commissioner pursuant to section 25-0201 of the Act and to

any adjacent area. Any such order shall become effective on

the date it is filed in the office of the clerk of the

county in which such wetland is located. These regulations

shall be applicable in the following areas: Suffolk county,

Nassau county, all boroughs of the city of New York,

Westchester county and Rockland county.

Section 661.4 Definitions. The following terms when

used in this Part shall have the following meanings:

(a) "Act" shall mean the Tidal Wetlands Act (Article

25 of the environmental conservation law as from time to

time amended).

(b) "Adjacent area" shall mean any land immediately

adjacent to a tidal wetland within whichever of the following

limits is closest to the most landward tidal wetland boundary,

as such most landward tidal wetlands boundary is shown on an

inventory map (see explanatory figures 1-6):

(1) 300 feet landward of said most landward

boundary of a tidal wetland, provided, however, that within

the boundaries of the city of New York this distance shall

be 150 feet (see figure 1); or

661.4

(2) to the seaward edge of the closest lawfully

an~d presently existing (i.e., as of the effective date of

this Part), functional and substantial man-made structure

(including, but not limited to, paved streets and highways,

railroads, bulkheads and sea walls, and rip-rap walls) which

lies generally parallel to said most landward tidal wetland

boundary and which is a minimum of 100 feet in length as

measured generally parallel to such most landward boundary,

but not including individual buildings (see figure 2); or

(3) to the elevation contour of 10 feet above

mean sea level, except when such contour crosses the seaward

face of a bluff or cliff, or crosses a hill on which the

slope equals or exceeds the natural angle of repose of the

soil, then to the topographic crest of such bluff, cliff, or

hill (see figures 3 and 4). Pending the determination by

the commissioner in a particular case, the most recent, as

of the effective date of this Part, topographical maps

published by the United States geological survey, department

of the interior, having a scale of 1:24,000, shall be

rebuttable presumptive evidence of such 10 foot elevation.

Adjacent area shall not include any area lying landward

of an imaginary line drawn between the seaward edges of two

existing substantial man-made structures which constitute

the landward limit of an adjacent area, as provided in

paragraph (2) of this subdivision, where the area landward

661.4

-12-

of such imaginary line does not have located thereon any

such man-made structures and where such imaginary line is

less than than 100 feet in length, as measured generally

parallel to the most landward limit of the tidal wetland

involved (see figure 5).

Where land lies within the boundaries of an adjacent

area defined by paragraph (1) or paragraph (3) of this

subdivision but appears to be excluded from an adjacent area

by paragraph (2) or the immediately preceding paragraph of

this subdivision, such land shall be deemed to be part of an

adjacent area (see figure 6). Provided, however, that in

such instances of overlap between the various provisions of

this subdivision the regional permit administrator may in

his discretion determine that said land is not an adjacent

area for the purposes of this Part if factors are present

which in his opinion justify treating such land as non-

adjacent area in light of the provisions in paragraph (2) or

the immediately preceding paragraph of this subdivision.

The construction of a new substantial man-made struc-

ture described in paragraph (2) of this subdivision after

the effective date of this Part shall not be deemed to limit

the extent of an adjacent area.

Adjacent area shall also include any extended adjacent

area identified during the moratorium period, as established

by section 25-0202 of the act, pursuant to the provisions of

* ~6 NYCRR 660.1(c).

F7 Adjacent area on upland

w Wetland

Bluff or Ci~ff

(7)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4
PROFILE

10 ft. elevation

WU . I

LAdjacent Area

I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~300 ft.
300 ft.

Less than 3:0O ft.

(2) -Bulkhead

0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 0 -

or Less than~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o

CD~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~0C

or~~~~Wl

,~~~~~~0 Less tan
Blha300 t

U~~~~~~30f. Al

661.4

- 14-

application for a permit issued by the department pursuant

to this Part and who is either the owner of the land on

which the proposed regulated activity will be located, a

contract vendee of such owner, a lessee of such owner, or

the person who will actually control and direct the under-

taking of the proposed activity.

(d) "Aquaculture" shall mean the cultivation an~d

harvesting of products that naturally are produced in the

marine environment, including fish, shellfish,crustaceans

and seaweed, and the installation of cribs, racks and

in-water structures for cultivating such products, but shall

not mean the construction of any building, any filling or

dredging or the construction of any water regulating structures.

(e) "Chief administrative officer" shall mean in the

case of a city or a village, the mayor thereof, in the case

of a town, the supervisor thereof, and, in the case of a

county not wholly within a city, the county executive or

county legislative body.

(f "Chief permit administrator" shall mean any

employee of the department who is designated by the commis-

sioner to act in such capacity.

(g "Commercial use" shall mean any use involving the

sale, rental or distribution of facilities (including but

not limited to tourist accommodations and storage facilties),

661.4

-15-

goods, services or commodities, either retail or wholesale,

or the provision of recreational facilities for a fee.

(h) "Commercial use building" shall mean any building

in excess of 100 square feet associated with a commercial

use.

(i) "Commissioner" shall mean the commissioner of

environmental conservation or his duly authorized repre-

sentative.

(j) "Department" shall mean the department of environ-

mental conservation.

(k) "Dredging" shall mean the excavation or removal of

sediment, soil, mud, sand, shells, gravel or other aggregate

from any tidal wetland or adjacent area for the direct or

indirect purpose of establishing or increasing water depth,

increasing the surface or cross-sectional area of a waterway,

or obtaining such sediment, soil, mud, sand, gravel, shells

or other aggregate. Provided however, such term shall not

include acquiring samples of sediment, soil, mud, sand,

shells, gravel or other aggregate; acquiring the natural

products of tidal wetlands by recreational or commercial

fishing, shellfishing, aquaculture, hunting or trapping

where otherwise legally permitted; or maintenance dredging

as defined in subdivision (r) below.

(1) "In existence" or "existing" shall mean, with

respect to any land use and development (except a subdivi-

661.4

-16-

sion), that such land use and development has been sub-

stantially commenced or completed, and with respect to any

subdivision of land, or portion thereof, shall mean that
such subdivision, or portion, has been substantially commenced

or completed and that substantial expenditures have been

made for structures or improvements directly -related thereto.

(in) "Industrial use" shall mean any manufacturing,

production or assembly of goods or materials and any mineral

extraction operation.

(n) "Industrial use building" shall mean any building

in excess of 100 square feet associated with an industrial

use.

(o) "Inventory map" shall mean a final tidal wetlands

boundary map established by the commissioner pursuant to
subdivision four of section 25-0201 of the Act depicting the

boundary lines of tidal wetlands and filed in the office of
the county clerk in the county in which such wetlands are

located.

(p) "Land use and development" or "use" shall mean any

construction or other activity which materially changes the

use or appearance of land or a structure or the intensity of

use of land or a structure, including but not limited to any

regulated activity.

(q) "Lawfully" shall mean in full compliance with all

applicable statutes, rules and regulations.

661.4

-17-

(r) "Maintenance dredging" shall mean dredging to

maintain or restore water depth to a depth which can be

proved to have existed on or after January 1, 1965, in a

location actually being specifically and lawfully utilized

as of the effective date of this Part, and as of the date of

the proposed maintenance dredging, for (1) moving or mooring

vessels or machinery or (2) as a water intake or discharge

channel or zone.

(s) "Mineral extraction" shall mean any extraction

(not including the taking of specimens, dredging, or maintenance

dredging) from any tidal wetland or adjacent area of stone,

coal, salt, ore, tale, granite, petroleum products, sand and

gravel or other materials, including the construction,

alteration or maintenance of mine roads, mine tailing piles

or dumps and mine drainage.

(t) "Multiple family dwelling" shall mean any apart-

ment, town house, condominium or similar building, including

the conversion of an existing single family dwelling to a

structure designed for occupancy in separate living quarters

by more than one family.

(u) "Municipality" shall mean a village, town or city

or a county in the case-of a county not wholly included

within a city.

(v) "Permit" shall mean that form of departmental

approval required by this Part for the carrying on of a

regulated activity.

661.4

(w) "Person" shall mean any individual, public or

private corporation, political subdivision, government

agency, department or bureau of the state, bi-state author-

ity, municipality, industry, co-partnership, association,

firm, trust, estate or any other legal entity whatsoever.

(x) "Pollutant"t shall mean any form of pollution.

(y) "Pollution'" shall mean the presence in the envi-

ronment of conditions or contaminants in quantities or

characteristics which are or may be injurious to human,

plant, or marine life, wildlife, or other animal life, or to

property, or which unreasonably interfere with t he com-

fortable enjoyment of life and property throughout such

tidal wetlands as may be affected thereby.

(z) "Principal building" shall mean any one of the

following: single family dwelling; each two units of a
multiple family dwelling; any other type of building,

including but not limited to any commercial or industrial

use building or public or semi-public building, that exceeds

1,000 square feet in area and each additional 1,000 square

feet of floor space of such a building in excess of 3,000

square feet. In addition, each commercial or industrial use

building or public or semi-public building less than 1,000

square feet in area shall count as one-quarter of a principal

* ~~building.

661.4

-19-

(aa) "Project" shall mean any action which may result

in direct or indirect physical impact on a tidal wetland,

including, but not limited to, any regulated activity.

(bb) "Public or community sewage disposal system" shall

mean any sewage disposal system for which the discharge to

such system has been authorized by a SPDES permit issued

pursuant to Article 17 of the environmental conservation

law.

(cc) "Public or semi-public building" shall mean any

municipal building, library building, school or college

building, hospital building, building used as a place of

worship, museum building, research center building, rehabili-

tation center building or any similar building.

(dd) "Regional permit administrator" shall mean an

employee of the department designated by the commissioner to

act in such capacity within the jursidiction of a regional

office of the department.

(ee) "Regulated activity" shall mean:

(1) any form of draining, dredging, excavation or

removal, either directly or indirectly, of soil, mud, sand,

shells, gravel or other aggregate;

(2) any form of dumping, filling or depositing,

either directly or indirectly, of any soil, stones, sand,

gravel, mud, rubbish or fill of any kind;

661.4

-20-

(3) the erection of any structures or construc-

tion of any facilities or roads, the driving of any pilings

or placing of any other obstructions, whether or not changing

the ebb and flow of the tide;

(4) any form of pollution;

(5) any portion of a subdivision of land located
in any tidal wetland or adjacent area;

(6) any other new activity within a tidal wetland

or on an adjacent area which directly or indirectly may

substantially alter or impair the natural condition or

function of any tidal wetland.

Regulated activity shall include, but not be limited

to, any activity listed in section 661.5(b) as a generally

compatible use - permit required (GCp), presumptively incom-

patible use - permit required (PIp), incompatible use (I) or

permit required (P) for the applicable area. Regulated

activity shall not include any activity listed in section

661.5 of this Part as a use not requiring a permit or

notification letter approval (NPN) for the applicable area.

Regulated activity may include any activity listed in

section 661.5 as a generally compatible use - notification
letter required (GCn) for the applicable area.

(ff) "Single family dwelling" shall mean any detached

building containing one dwelling unit, including any mobile
home.

661.4

-21-

(gg) "Subdivision of land" or "subdivision" shall mean

any division of land into two or more lots, parcels or

sites, whether adjoining or not, for the purpose of sale,

lease, license or any form of separate ownership or occ-u-

pancy (including any grading, road construction, installa-

tion of utilities or other improvements or any other land

use and development preparatory or incidental to any such

division) by any person or by any other person controlled

by, under common control with or controlling such person or

by any group of persons acting in concert as part of a

common scheme or plan. Subdivision of land shall not

include the lease of land for hunting and fishing and other

open space recreation uses and shall not include the divi-

sion of land by bona fide gift, devise or inheritance by and

from natural persons.

(hh) "Tidal wetlands" or "wetlands" shall mean any

lands delineated as tidal wetlands on an inventory map and

shall comprise the following classifications as delineated

on such map:

(1) coastal fresh marsh - The tidal wetland zone,

designated FM4 on an inventory map, found primarily in the

upper tidal limits of riverine systems where significant

fresh water inflow dominates the tidal zone. Species

normally associated with this zone include narrow leaved

cattail, Typha angustifolia; the tall brackish water cord-

661.4

-22-

grasses, Spartina pectinata and/or S. cynosuroides; and the

more typically emergent fresh water species such as arrow

arum, Peltandra; pickerel weed, Pondederia; and cutgrass,

Leersia.

(2) intertidal marsh - The vegetated tidal wet-

land zone, designated IM on an inventory map, lying generally

between average high and low tidal elevation. The predomi-

nant vegetation in this zone is low marsh cordgrass, Spartina

alterniflora.

(3) coastal shoals, bars and flats - The tidal

wetland zone, designated SM on an inventory map, that (i) at

high tide is covered by water, (ii) at low tide is exposed or

is covered by water to a maximum depth of approximately one

foot, and (iii) is not vegetated by low marsh cordgrass,

Spartina alterniflora, except as otherwise determined in a

specific case as provided in section 661.26.

(4) littoral zone - The tidal wetlands zone,

designated LZ on an inventory map, that includes all lands

under tidal waters which are not included in any other

category, except as otherwise determined in a specific case

as provided in section 661.26. Provided, there shall be no

littoral zone under waters deeper than six feet at mean low

water. Pending determination by the commissioner in a

particular case, the most recent, as of the effective date

of this Part, national ocean survey maps published by the

661.4
661.5

-23-

national ocean survey, national oceanic and atmospheric

administration shall be rebuttable presumptive evidence of

such six foot depth.

(5) high marsh or salt meadow - The normal

uppermost tidal wetland zone, designated HM on an inventory

map, usually dominated by salt meadow grass, Spartina

patens; and spike grass, Distichlis spicata. This zone is

periodically flooded by spring and storm tides and is often

vegetated by low vigor, Spartina alterniflora and Seaside

lavender, Limonium carolinianum. Upper limits of this zone

often include black grass, Juncus Gerardi: chairmaker's

rush, Scirpus sp; marsh elder, Iva frutescens; and groundsel

bush, Baccharis halimifolia.

(6) formerly connected tidal wetlands - The tidal

wetlands zone, designated FC on an inventory map, in which

normal tidal flow is restricted by man-made causes. Typical

tidal wetland plant species may exist in such areas although

they may be infiltrated with common reed, Phragmites sp.

Section 661.5 Use Guidelines.

(a) (1) Any type of use designated in this section as

a use not requiring a permit or notification letter approval

for the type of area involved is not subject to the permit

or notification letter requirements of this Part.

661. 5

-24-

(2) Any type of use designated in this section as

a generally compatible use for the type of area involved is

generally compatible with that type of area and with the

preservation, protection and enhancement of the present and

potential value of tidal wetlands if undertaken in that

area. The compatibility of a particular use depends on the

particular location, design and probable impact of the

proposed use. Generally compatible uses are subject to

either the notification letter requirements or permit

requirements of this Part.

(3) Any type of use designated in this section as

a presumptively incompatible use for the type of area

involved shall be presumed not to be compatible with the

type of area involved or with the preservation, protection

or enhancement of the present and potential values of tidal

wetlands if undertaken in that area. Any such use is

subject to the permit requirements of this Part.

(4) Any type of use designated in this section as

an incompatible use is not compatible with the type of area

involved or with the preservation, protection or enhancement

of the present and potential values of tidal wetlands if

undertaken in that area. Any such use is subject to the

permit requirements of this Part.

Nothing in this subdivision shall be deemed to remove

any burden of proof imposed on an applicant by section

661.10 of this Part.

661.5

-25-

(b) The classification of uses in coastal fresh

marshes, intertidal marshes, coastal shoals, bars and flats,

high marshes or salt meadows, littoral zones, and adjacent

areas, shall be as respectively indicated in the following

chart:

661.5
-26-
ABBREVIATIONS
Area Cntccories Use Categories
FM - Coastal Fresh Marsh NPN - Uses Not Requiring a Permit or Notification Letter Approval
IM - Intertidal Marsh GCn - Generally Compatible Use - Notification Letter Required
SM - Coastal Shoals, Bars and Flats GCp - Generally Compatible Use - Permit Required
LZ- Littoral Zone PIp - Presumptively Incompatible Use - Permit Required
HM - High Marsh or Salt Meadow I - Incompatible Use
AA - Adjacent Area P - Permit Required
NA = Not Applicable
Uses Area and Use CateRgories
nl IMJ ([1 S,, LZ AA
I. The continuance of lawfully existing uses (including but not limited to residential,
coimnercial, industrial, agricultural, recreational, nnd public uses) and the continu-
ance of all activities normally and directly associated with ray such use, where such
continuance does not involve exnansion or significant alteration of the existing use. NPN NPN NPN
2. Activities of the department of hcaith or of units of Local gorernmenrt with respect to
public health, when conducted in conformance with section 25->01X of the Act. MPN NPN NPN
3. Activities subje-t to the review jurisdiction of thile public service commission or the
state board on electric generation siting and the environment inder article seven or
article eight of the public service law, respectively. The standards and restrictions
of this Part will be applied by said bodies in determining whether to issue a certifi-
cate of environmental compatibilitv and public need under such articles. NPN . PN NPN
4. Establishing scenic, historic, w-ildlife and scientific preserves, without any material
alteration of th2 area involved. NPN MPN NPN
5. Boating, hiking, swimming, camping, picnicking and other sinilair non-motorized forms of
outdoor activit%. MPN MNPH -PN
6. Depositing or removing the natural products of a tidal wetland (or adjacent area) in the
process of recreltional or cotrercial fishing, shellfishing, asuaculture, hunting or
tranin.e, including the erection and maintenance of teanotrary ides or blinds. MPN NPN NPN
7. Conducting educational and research activities not involving aiy material alteration of
the area involvei. NPN NPH NPH
8. Establishing waling. trails without material alteration of the area involved. NP N1 PPN,
- 9. Establishing olaitings. GCn GCn NPN
10. Establisning recreacional moorin-s. MP P: M
11. Operation of notr vehicles, including but not limited to air seats and other all-terrain
vehicles, for educational or scientific research purposes (provided this item shall not
include ooeratica of aircraft or mechanically propelled vessel; other than air boats). GCn GC- NMPN
12. Operation of morar vehicles, including but not limited to air seats and other all-terrain
vehicles, for other than educational or scientific purposes (provided this item shall
not include the use co aircraft or mechanically provelled vess.ls other than air boats). PIo CCp NPN
13, O-eraticn of a-l raft cr 7.echa-.ica l-v srcoelled vessels oc.er ..,.n air beats, iN .o N P N'
14. Constructing ora open pile cacI-aik and/or. dock not greater hsa four feet in width for
any principal -rilding. GCn GCn GCn
15. Constructing open pile catwalks and docks more than four feet te width; or constructing
more than one open pile catwalk and/or dock not greater than four feet in width for any
princival buildir-. PIP) GCo GCD
16. Installing a floating dock(s) cotalling less than 200 scuare feet in area. c-n MPH MPH
17. Installing a floating dock(s) roCalling 200 scuare feet or mor in area. Pip G Cn GCn
18. Relocation and/or rearrangement of floating docks, open pile decks, and similar
structures within an established marina or boat basin where such activities involve no
disturbance of a tital :etland other than removing and relocating anchors or pilings. PIP NPN NPN
19. Constructing solid fill docks. PIp PT, GCD
20. Permanent or seasonal mooring of any vessel or structure to be used as a single family
dwelling, multiple family dwelling, commercial use building, industrial u~e building or
oublic or semi-public building. PIP GCOp GC -
21. Ordinary maintenance and repair (not involving expansion or substantial restoration,
reconstruction or modification) of existing functional structures, facilities or improved
areas, including but not limited to bridges, roads, highways, railroad beds, bulkheads,
docks, beaches, piers, wharves, pilings, dolphins, buildings, landscaped or paved areas,
lawns, and agricultural and mosquito control ditches. -- Including for example, replac-
ing broken boards in docks, repainting structures, redriving pilings, resurfacing paved
areas, installing and removing lawful structures on a seasonal basis. NPN NPN NPN
22. In-kind and in-place replacement of existing functional bulkheads and similar
structures. NPN MPH NP
23. Routine beach regrading and cleaning. both above and below mean high water mark. PIl NPN
24. Substantial restoration or reconstruction, of existing functional structures or facili-
ties of any kind, except for those covered by items 22 and 26, (provided, where the in-
stallation of a new structure or facility is listed in this subdivision as GCn or NPN for
a particular type of area, the substantial restoration or reconstruction of such a struc-
ture or facility on that area shall be treated in the same manner as the installation of
such a new structure or facility). GC- GCo GCn
25. Expansion or substantial modification of existing functional facilities and structures,
except for those actions covered by items 26, 33, 34 or 38 (provided where the installa-
tion of a new structure or facility is listed in this subdivision as NPN, GCn or CGp,
the expansion or substantial modification of such a structure or facility shall be
treated in the same manner in that area). PIP cCp GCn-
26. Substantial restoration, reconstruction, modification or expansion of existing function-
al residential structures which are and will continue to be located 75 feet or more (or
30 feet or more in Hew York Citvy from thre mios; landward ed.-e of anry tidal wetland. MA NA P
27. Dredging. PIP PI PTP
28. Maintunance dred_-int. OCa CCn cCn
29. Constructinn or groins, bulkheads. and other shoreline stabilization structures. PIP GCC cCa
30. Filline. pTP PIP CC
31. Di;no'aL of drc-]::cd material. I,
L 32. C(,n true t lno (i hbo_,2n; . Pip - IPc-Ci
33. fco trIicto ri or ai C:;tnrt ial n;. i itficati u or mnsrli to control[ di tchlesi. C Ca:3 crCr I
34. Construction or ;ub:;taitici mod itication of drailnage l itches fur otier than agreicultural
or mosquito control pDrnpars. PI P GCpJ

661.5
-27-

Uses Area and Use Categories
lM. Da. IM SM LZ NA
35. Cultivating and harvesting naturally occurring agricultural and Jorticultural products,
other than activitces covered by items 36 and 37 below. NPN NPN '- PN
36. Manual harvcstin.w or salt hay. NPN NA NA
37. Harvestiglc or salt hay bv mechanical equipment. GCn NA NA
38. Substantial modification of agricultural ditches lawfully existilg on the effective
date of this Part. GCo GCP GCn
39. Sew agricultural activities not covered byv itms 3d5-34. PIp PID GCp
40. Connection or electric, gas, sewer, water, telephone or other ucilities from an existing
distribution utili4v facility to an existing structure. GCn GCn UtPN
41. Installation or un.erground electric, sewer, water or ocher util ties where such install-
ation will involve restoration of existing ground elevation, other than activities covered
by item -0. GCD GCp rC
42. Installation of electric, gas, sewer, water or other utilities, >ther than activities
covered bv item 40 or 41. P PIP C
.43. Installation of a irv velL, retention basin, filter. open swale r nond. PIP PIp CCD
44. New discharge of any pollutant requiring a SPDES permit pursuant to the environmental
conservation law and comDlvinz with the requirements for the iss rance of such a permit. P P
45. Installation of a sewage disposal septic tank, cesspool, leach f.eld, or seepage pit and
discharge of any pollutant into such facilities not requiring a ?DES permit pursuant to
article 17 of the environmental conservation law. PIp PIo cCo -J
46. Construction of sictle fa;nil- dwellinLs and multiole familv d';el:inzs. PIp PID ";C"
47, Construction of commercial and industrial use facilities requiring water access and public
and semi-public buildings requiring water access; and undertakin, commercial and indus-
trial use activitiss reouirin_ -eater access. Pip PIn ':Co
48. Construction of ccmmercial and industrial use facilities not reqa:iring water access and
public or semi-putlic buildings not requiring water access; and ndertaking cormmercial
and industrial uso activities not reeuirin_ water access. PIp PIp l'IP
49. Construction of accessory structures or facilities for any use listed in items 46 and 47,
other than accessory structures or facilities covered by item 50 or covered specifically
in this list. Pip PI (,Co
50. Construction of accessory structures or facilities for existing residential structures
where such accessory structures or facilities are and will cotir.ue to be located 75
feet or more (or 30 feet or more in the City of New York) from tie most landward edge
of any tidal wetland. NA NA 1'ri
51. Construction of acc.essorv structures or facilities for any use ltsted in item 48. PIe PIo PIi
'52. Disoosal of any chemical. oeterchemical or other toxic material, iuciudina any pesticide. I I I
53. The use or application of any chemical, petrochemical, or other :oxrc material, includ-
inz any pesticide. where not authorized by law. I I I
54. The storage of any chemical, petrochemical, or other toxic mater al, including any
pesticide, for wholesale purposes or for purposes of distribution to persons other
than the ultimate user of such materials. I PIP
55. The use or application of any chemical, petrochemical, or other :oxic material, includ-
ing any pesticide, where otherwise authorized by law, or the storage of any such material
for purposes other than wholesaling or distribution to persons other than the ultimate
users of such materials. NPN NPN NPN
56. Disposal of solid wastes as defined in section 27-0501 of the environmental conserva-
tion law. I I PIP
"57. Any type of regulated activity not specifically listed in this chart and any subdivi-
sion of land. P P P

0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

661.5
661.6

-28-

For formerly connected tidal wetlands, uses not

requiring a permit or notification letter approval, generally

compatible uses, presumptively incompatible uses and incompatible

uses shall be deemed to be the same respectively as the type

of wetland which a particular formerly connected tidal

wetland most closely resembles.

(d) Uses not specifically listed in subdivision (b).

For any regulated activity covered by item 57 in subdivision

(b) of this section, the regional permit administrator shall

on a case-by-case basis classify such cases as GCp, PIp, or

I under subdivision (b), utilizing the listed items as a

guideline for such classification.

Section 661.6 Development restrictions.

(a) No person shall undertake any new regulated

activity on any tidal wetland or on any adjacent area except

in compliance with the following development restrictions:

(1) The minimum setback of all principal buildings

and all other structures that are in excess of 100 square

feet (other than boardwalks, shoreline promenades, docks,

bulkheads, piers, wharves, pilings, dolphins, or boathouses

and structures typically located on docks, piers or wharves)

shall be seventy-five feet landward from the most landward

edge of any tidal wetland. Provided, however, within the

661. 6

-29-

boun~daries of the city of New York the minimum setback

required by this paragraph shall be thirty feet. Further

provided, where numerous and substantially all structures

which are,(i) of the type proposed by the applicant, (ii)

lawfully existing on the effective date of this Part and

(iii) within 500 feet of the subject property, are located

closer to the subject tidal wetland than the minimum setback

required by this paragraph, placement of a structure as

close as the average setback of these existing structures

from the subject tidal wetland shall fulfill the require-

ments of this paragraph.

(2) The minimum setback of any on-site sewage

disposal septic tank, cesspool, leach field or seepage pit

shall be 100 feet landward from the most landward edge of

any tidal wetland.

(3) For any on-site sewage disposal cesspool,

septic tank, leach field or seepage pit there shall be a

minimum of two feet of soil between the bottom of such pool,

tank, field or pit and the seasonal high ground water level,

rock, hardpan, or other impermeable materials.

(4) Not more than twenty percent of the adjacent

area, as such term is defined in this Part, on any lot shall

be covered by existing and new structures and other impervious

surfaces. Provided, however, this paragraph shall not be

deemed to prohibit the coverage of 3,000 square feet or less

661. 6

-30-

of adjacent area on any individual lot lawfully existing on

the effective date of this Part by existing and new structures

and other impervious surfaces.

(5) The minimum lot area for any principal

building constructed within the area regulated by this Part,

which minimum lot area shall include any wetland portion and

any adjacent area portion of such lot, shall be as follows:

(i) 20,000 square feet where such principal

building will be served by a public or community sewage

disposal system;

(ii) 40,000 square feet where such principal

building will not be served by a public or community sewage

disposal system.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Part, the

requirements of this paragraph for buildings to be served by

a public or community sewage disposal system shall not be

applicable within the boundaries of the city of New York.

(6) Notwithstanding the minimum lot size provi-

sions contained in paragraph five of this section, the

clustering of principal buildings utilized for residential

purposes, including multiple family dwellings, shall be

permitted at the request of an applicant for a permit under

this Part in order to encourage the maintenance of undeveloped

areas in or adjoining tidal wetlands. Provided, such

clustering procedure shall in no case result in more prin-

661.6

-31-

cipal buildings on the area regulated by this Part than

would be permitted by the application of the minimum lot

size criteria in paragraph five of this subdivision.

(7) The minimum setback of all hard surface

driveways, roads and parking lots and similar impervious

surfaces exceeding 500 square feet in size on the property

involved, overhead utility line poles and railroads shall be

seventy-five feet from any tidal wetland. Provided, within

the boundaries of the city of New York the minimum setback

required by this paragraph shall be thirty feet. Further

provided, this provision shall not be applicable to any

portion of a regulated activity that involves a crossing or

direct access to a tidal wetland on the subject property.

(8) Any substantial increase in surface water

run-off to tidal waters classified SA, as defined in 6 NYCRR

�701.5, or to any other surface waters which are within

1,000 feet of any SA waters and are adjacent or tributary to

such SA waters, shall be prevented from directly running

into any such waters by the utilization of sufficient run-

off control measures, including but not limited to, the

installation of dry wells, retention basins, filters, open

swales or ponds. Any such dry well, retention basin,
filter, open swale or pond to be constructed in order to
prevent direct surface water run-off to said SA and other

surface waters shall be designed and constructed to handle

661. 6
661. 7

-32-

the water run-off produced on the project site by a five

year storm.

(b) The minimumn lot size or average lot size pro-

visions contained in paragraphs five and six of subdivision

(a) of this section shall not be applicable to any vacant

lot in a subdivision lawfully in existence on the effective

date of this Part, or in a subdivision which received all

required state, regional and local approvals prior to the

effective date of this Part, for the purposes of placing one

single family dwelling on such lot. Furthermore, such

provisions shall not be applicable to any single vacant lot

which was on record on the effective date of this Part for

the purpose of placing one single family dwelling thereon,

provided such lot does not adjoin other lots in the same

ownership, except that all such lots in the same ownership

may be treated together as one lot.

Section 661.7 Uses not requiring a permit or notifi-

cation letter approval.

(a) Any use, where otherwise legally permitted, listed

in section 661.5 of this Part as a use not requiring a

permit or notification letter approval (N'PN) for a parti-

cular tidal wetland zone or for an adjacent area may be

undertaken in such tidal wetland zone or adjacent area

without a permit or a notification letter approval under

661. 7

-33 -

this Part, provided such activity does not involve a regu-

lated activity.

(b) Any alteration of a tidal wetland or adjacent area

with respect to which a moratorium permit has been issued

pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 660, or with respect to which a

permit pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 608 shall have been issued

prior to September 1, 1973, may be undertaken or continued

pursuant to the terms of such permit without a permit or a

notification letter under this Part; provided, however, that

any such alteration that is defined in this Part as a regulated

activity or an activity requiring a notification letter

shall be treated for all purposes as a new activity under

the provisions or' this Part as of June 1, 1977, if such

activity has not been substantially commenced as of that

date. The department may extend the exemption herein

provided for an alteration covered by a moratorium permit or

Part 608 permit beyond June 1, 1977 if in the department's

judgment the pertinent natural or man-made conditions which

existed at and adjacent to the site at the time such permit

was issued have not substantially changed and the site is

still suitable for the permitted activity. Notwithstanding

the foregoing, no alteration of a tidal wetland zone or

adjacent area authorized by a permit pursuant to Part 660 or

Part 608 that is treated as an incompatible use for such

zone or area under section 661.5 of this Part shall be

661. 7
661. 8
661. 9
-34-

undertaken or continued in that zone or area after the

effective date of this Part except in compliance with the

provisions of this Part.

Section 661.8 Notification letter requirements.

No person shall conduct any new use listed in section

661.5 of this Part as a generally compatible use - noti-

fication letter required (GCn) for a particular tidal

wetland or adjacent area on that wetland or adjacent area an

or after the effective date of this Part -unless such person

has first submitted a notification letter stating his intent

to conduct such activity to the regional permit administrator

and has received the written approval of such administrator,

pursuant to the provisions of section 661.14 of this Part.

Section 661.9 Permit requirements.

(a) No person shall conduct a new regulated activity

on or after the effective date of this Part on any tidal

wetland or any adjacent area unless such person has first

obtained a permit pursuant to this Part. Regulated activities

for each type of tidal wetland zone and for adjacent areas

include, but are -not limited to, all types of uses specifi-

cally listed in section 661.5 of this Part as generally

compatible use - permit required (GCp), presumptively

incompatible use (PIp), and incompatible use (I) for the

661. 9
661. 10
-.35-

type of area involved.

(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision (a)

of this section, where a regulated activity is proposed for

an adjacent area, where such activity is not a presumptively

incompatible use or incompatible use for adjacent areas

under section 661.5 of this Part, and where the regional

permit administrator determines that such regulated activity

will meet all of the development restrictions contained in

section 661.6 of this Part and that such activity will not

directly or indirectly substantially alter or impair the

-natural condition, function or values of any tidal wetland,

the regional permit administrator shall treat the proposed

activity as an activity requiring a notification letter

under sections 661.8 and 661.14 of this Part; and such

activity shall not require a permit under this Part.

Section 661.10 Standards for issuance of permits.

(a) Burden of proof. The applicant shall have the

burden of establishing that the applicable standards of this

section will be met.

(b) Standards for permits on any tidal wetland.

(1) Overall standards. The department shall

issue a permit for a proposed regulated activity on any

tidal wetland only if it is determined that the proposed

activity:

661. 10

-36-

(i) is compatible with the policy of the Act

to preserve and protect tidal wetlands and to prevent their

despoliation and destruction in that such regulated activity

will not have an undue adverse impact on the present or

potential value of the affected tidal wetland area or

adjoining or nearby tidal wetland areas for marine food

production, wildlife habitat, flood and hurricane and storm

control, cleansing ecosystems, absorption of silt and

organic material, recreation, education, research, or open

space and aesthetic appreciation, as more particularly set

forth in the findings in section 661.2 of this Part, taking

into account the social and economic benefits which may be

derived from the proposed activity;

(ii) is compatible with the public health and

welfare;

(iii) is reasonable and necessary, taking into

account such factors as reasonable alternatives to the

proposed regulated activity and the degree to which the

activity requires water access or is water dependent;

(iv) complies with the development restric-

tions contained in section 661.6 of this Part; and

(v) complies with the use guidelines con-

tained in section 661.5 of this Part. If a proposed regu-

lated activity is a presumptively incompatible use under

such section, there shall be a presumption that the proposed

661. 10

-37-

regulated activity may not be undertaken in the subject area

because it is not compatible with the area involved or with

the preservation, protection or enhancement of the present

or potential values of tidal wetlands if undertaken in that

area. The applicant shall have the burden of overcoming

such presumption and demonstrating that the proposed activity

will be compatible with the area involved and with the

preservation, protection and enhancement of the present and

potential values of tidal wetlands. If a use is a type of

use listed as an incompatible use in the use guidelines for

the area involved, it shall not be undertaken on that area.

(2) Formerly connected tidal wetland. In addi-

tion to the standards contained in paragraph one of this

subdivision, the department shall issue a permit for a

regulated activity on a formerly connected tidal wetland

only if it is determined that the proposed activity will be

consistent with the possible future restoration of any

portion of the tidal wetland adjoining or surrounding the

project site to its original condition.

department shall issue a permit for a proposed regulated

activity on an adjacent area only if it is determined that

the proposed regulated activity:

(1) is compatible with the public health and

welfare;

661. 10

-38-

(2) complies with the development restrictions

contained in section 661.6 of this Part;

(3) will not have an undue adverse impact on the

present or potential value of any adjacent or nearby tidal

wetland for marine food production, wildlife habitat, flood

and hurricane and storm control, cleansing ecosystems,

absorption of silt and organic material, recreation, educa-

tion, research or open space and aesthetic appreciation,

taking into account the social and economic benefits which

may be derived from the proposed activity; and

(4) complies with the use guidelines contained in

section 661.5 of this Part. If a proposed activity is a

presumptively incompatible use for adjacent areas -under such

section, there shall be a presumption that the proposed

activity may not be undertaken on the adjacent area because

it is not compatible with the preservation, protection, or

enhancement of the present and potential values of tidal

wetlands if undertaken in that area. The applicant shall

have the burden of overcoming such presumption and demon-

strating that the proposed regulated activity will be

compatible with the preservation, protection and enhancement

of the present and potential values of tidal wetlands. If a

use is a type of use listed as an incompatible use, it shall

not be undertaken on such adjacent area.

661. 10

-39-

(d) Notice of acquisition. Written notice by the

department to an applicant proposing a regulated activity,

or written notice to the department from the state or any

agency or subdivision thereof, that the state or any such

agency or subdivision is in the process of acquiring the

tidal wetland or adjacent area on which the proposed regu-

lated activity would be located by negotiation or condem-

nation shall be sufficient basis for denial of a permit for

such regulated activity. Such notice may be provided at any

time prior to the department's decision to issue or deny a

permit for a regulated activity.

(e) In determining whether the standards contained in

subdivisions (b) and (c) of this section will be fulfilled

by a proposed regulated activity, the department may in its

discretion consider any proposal made by the applicant in

his application to enhance the existing values served by a

wetland on or in the vicinity of the site of the proposed

regulated activity or to create and sustain new wetland

values in or in the vicinity of the site of the proposed

regulated activity, provided such proposal relates to an

area that is or will be regulated under this Part.

(f) In any case in which an activity is specified as a

use not requiring a permit or notification letter approval

(NPN) or a generally compatible use - notification letter

required (GCn) under section 661.5 but requires a permit

661.10
661.11

-40-

pursuant to title 5 of article 15 of the environmental

conservation law, the standards of this Part will be applied

in the department's review of such activity under article 15.

Section 661.11 Conditions to a permit.

(a) Any permit issued pursuant to this Part may be

issued with conditions. Such conditions may be attached as

are necessary to assure the preservation and protection of

affected tidal wetlands and to assure compliance with the

policy and provisions of the Act and the standards and

provisions of this Part.

(b) Every permit issued pursuant to this Part shall

contain the following conditions:

(1) the department shall have the right to

inspect the project from time to time;

(2) the permit shall expire on a date certain;

and

(3) the permit holder shall notify the regional

permit administrator of the date on which project construc-

tion is to begin, at least five days in advance of such

date.

authorize the undertaking of the authorized regulated

activity on a periodic basis, as specified in the permit,

over a period of time not exceeding ten years from the date

661. 11
661. 12
661. 13
-41-

of issuance of the permit. Such permit shall contain a

0 ~~condition requiring the permittee to notify the regional

permit administrator at least fourteen days in advance of

each occasion upon which the permitted activity will be

conducted.

Section 661.12 Existing land use and development.

(a) No provision of this Part shall be deemed to

prohibit or require the removal of any land use and develop-

ment, including any structure, lawfully in existence on the

effective date of this Part.

(b) The development restrictions in section 661.6

shall not be deemed to require a variance for the repair,

restoration or rebuilding, in whole or in part, of any

structure or facility lawfully in existence on or after the

effective date of this Part, although such repair, restora-

tion or rebuilding activities may be subject to the notifi-

cation letter or permit requirements of this Part; provided,

no such repair, restoration, or rebuilding shall increase

any existing non-compliance with the provisions of that

section.

Section 661.13 Variances.

Where there are practical difficulties in the way of

carrying out of any of the provisions of section 661.6 of

661. 13

-42-

this Part or where in the department's judgment the strict

application of the provisions of section 661.6 would be

contrary to the purposes of this Party the department shall

have authority in connection with its review of an appli-

cation for a permit under this Part to vary or modify the

application of any of such provisions in such a manner that

the spirit and intent of the pertinent provisions shall be

observed, that public safety and welfare are secured and

substantial justice done and that action pursuant to the

variance will not have an undue adverse impact on the

present or potential value of any tidal wetland for marine

food production, wildlife habitat, flood and hurricane and

storm control, cleansing ecosystems, absorption of silt and

organic material, recreation, education, research, or open

space and aesthetic appreciation. Any person wishing to

make application for such a variance shall do so in writing

in conjunction with his application for a permit under this

Part and shall specify the proposed variance, the facts

which support the granting of the variance and the minimum

variance necessary to alleviate the alleged difficulty. The

burden of showing that a variance to such provisions should

be granted shall rest entirely on the applicant.

The regional permit administrator may on his own

motion treat an application for a permit under this Part as

a request for a variance and may request from the applicant

* ~the information required by this section.

661. 14

-43-

Section 661.14 Notification letter procedures.

(a) A notification letter required to be submitted

pursuant to section 661.8 shall be filed with the regional

permit administrator and shall contain such information as

the regional permit administrator may require in order to

ascertain whether the proposed activity may constitute a

regulated activity. Either a letter, a form prepared by the

department, or the application form for a permit prescribed

under section 661.15 shall be an acceptable form of notifi-

cation letter. Any activity proposed pursuant to this

section shall be subject to the permit requirements of this

Part where the regional permit administrator determines such

activity may directly or indirectly substantially alter or

impair the natural condition or function of any tidal

wetland.

(b) Within fifteen days after receipt of a properly

completed notification letter, the regional permit adminis-

trator shall inform in writing the person filing such

notification letter whether the proposed activity may

proceed in accordance with the notification letter or

whether such activity constitutes a regulated activity. If

in the judgment of such administrator the proposed activity

may involve a regulated activity, the notification letter

may be treated as an application for a permit under section

661. 14

-44-

661.15 if it contains the information required for receipt

of an application under that section.

conditions in a written approval made in response to a

notification letter as may be necessary to insure that no

regulated activity will occur, that the unobstructed ebb and

flow of the tides and the natural contour, vegetation and

function of the wetland and nearby wetlands are preserved,

and that the development restrictions contained in section

661.6 are satisfied.

(d) Upon his issuance of an approval letter in response

to a notification letter, the regional permit administrator

shall cause a notice regarding such approval letter to be

made available for public inspection in the department' s

regional office. Such notice shall briefly describe the

activity proposed in the notification letter, and approved

by the department, including the name of the person under-

taking the activity, the location, nature and scope of the

activity, and any conditions placed by the department on the

undertaking of such activity.

(e) An approval letter issued in response to a noti-

fication letter may authorize the subject activity to be

undertaken once or more than once, as the regional permit

* ~administrator shall specify in the approval letter; provided,

however, that no approval letter shall authorize an approved

661. 14
661. 15

-45-

activity for a period of time exceeding ten years from the

date of issuance of the approval letter.

Section 661.15 Application for a permit.

(a) (1) An. application for a permit shall be filed by

the applicant with the regional permit administrator on a

form prescribed by the department. Such application shall

set forth the purpose, character and extent of the proposed

regulated activity and shall set forth with particularity

the reasons the applicant seeks a permit. The application

shall include a detailed description of the regulated

activity; a map showing the area of tidal wetland or adja-

cent area directly affected, with the location of the

proposed regulated activity thereon; a statement as to

feasible alternatives to the proposed activity on a site

that is not a tidal wetland or adjacent area or by means

that do not affect tidal wetlands; a statement identifying

the owner of the subject property and, where applicable,
written permission of said owner for the applicant to seek

permission for, and to carry out, the proposed activity; a

description of the planned use of the subject property once

the proposed regulated activity is completed; and such

additional information as the regional permit administrator

deems sufficient to enable the department to make the

findings and determinations required under this Part.

661. 15

-46-

(2) The application shall be accompanied by a

list of the names of the owners of record of lands adjacent

to the tidal wetland or adjacent area upon which the regu-

lated activity is to be un~dertaken and the names of known

claimants of water rights, of whom the applicant has notice,

which relate to any land within, or within three hundred

feet of the boundary of, the property on which the proposed

regulated activity is located.

(3) An application shall not be deemed to be

received until the regional permit administrator determines

that all such information, including any additional infor-

mation requested, has been supplied in a complete and

satisfactory form.

(4) The department shall mail a copy of the

application to the chief administrative officer, or his

designee, of each municipality in which the affected tidal

wetland or adjacent area, or portion thereof, is located.

(5) The department shall make the application,

including all documents and maps associated with it, avail-

able for public inspection at the regional office within

whose jurisdiction the affected tidal wetland or adjacent

area is located and at such other locations as may be

designated in the notice of hearing required by section

661.16. The department may require the applicant to provide

a reasonable number of copies of the application, including

associated documents and maps, for this purpose.

66IL. 1.5
661. 16

-47-

(b) The regional permit administrator may, on request

of the applicant or on his own motion, treat the application

as a request for a determination that the proposed project

is an action which does not require a permit under this Part

or requires only a notification letter approval. If he so

* ~~determines, the regional permit administrator shall so

-notify the applicant in writing. Such notice shall be made

available for public inspection in the department's regional

office. Any person may petition the commissioner for review

of such determination. The commissioner may hold a public

hearing on any such petition following the procedures

prescribed in this Part insofar as applicable and shall make

a written determination of his disposition of such petition,

stating his reasons therefor.

Section 661.16 Notice of hearing.

(a) The regional permit administrator shall as soon as

praticable after receipt of a completed application provide

the applicant with a notice of hearing. As the regional

permit administrator shall direct, the applicant shall

publish the notice of hearing at least 15 days prior to the

date set for the hearing, at his expense, at least once in

each of at least two newspapers of general circulation in

the county where the affected tidal wetland or adjacent area

is located.

661. 16

-48-

(b) The department may direct the applicant to post

copies of such notice conspicuously about the site of the

proposed project. Such postings shall be made at the

beginning of the period of newspaper notice made pursuant to

subdivision (a).

hearing the applicant shall send by mail a copy of the

notice of hearing to the chief administrative officer, or

his designee, of each municipality within whose boundaries

the affected tidal wetland or adjacent area or portion

thereof is located, to all owners of record of land adjacent

to the affected tidal wetland or adjacent area, and to all

known claimants of water rights, of whom the applicant has

notice, which relate to any land within, or within three

hundred feet of the boundary of, the property on which the

proposed regulated activity is located.

(d) At least fifteen days prior to the date set for

the hearing the department shall publish in the publication

required by section 3-0306(4) of the environmental conserva-

tion law a notice of the hearing.

(e) The notice of hearing required by subdivisions

(a), (b) and (c) of this section shall be in a form prescribed

by the department and shall:

(1) state the name of the applicant;

(2) specify the location and outline the scope of

* ~~the proposed regulated activity;

661. 16

-49-

(3) specify the date, time, place and nature of

* ~the public hearing on the proposed regulated activity;

(4) specify the legal authority and jurisdiction

under which the hearing is to be held, with reference to the

applicable statutory sections involved;

(5) specify that the department will hold the

hearing for the purpose of receiving evidence and arguments

from all persons that may be affected by the proposed

regulated activity and have filed timely notices of appearance;

(6) specify that persons wishing to be parties-

in-interest (other than the applicant, the department and

each municipality in which the affected tidal wetland or

adjacent area or any portion thereof is located) and eli-

gible to be heard at such public hearing must file a notice

of appearance with the regional permit administrator by 4:45

p.m. of the third business day next preceding the date of

the public hearing; specify that filing for this purpose

shall require actual receipt in the office of the regional

permit administrator; specify that such notice of appearance

must state the interest of such person in the project and

specific grounds in support of or opposition to, or a position

neither expressly supporting or opposing, the proposed

project; and specify that such statement must be relevant to

* ~the findings and determinations required of the department

under this Part;

661. 16
661. 17

-50-

(7) specify that if no notices of appearance

stating specific grounds of objection to the project relevant

to the findings and determinations required of the depart-

ment under this part are timely filed by any person and if

the applicant waives any public hearing, then the public

hearing may be cancelled by the regional permit adminis-

trator and the department may proceed to review the proposed

regulated activity;

(8) specify where the application, including all

documents and maps therewith, is available for public

inspection; and

(9) specify the namie and telephone number of a

department employee who can provide information regarding

the application.

Section 661.17 Statements by public.

Any person whether or not wishing to be a party-in-

interest may file a written statement relating to the

project with the department at any time before or during the

hearing. Such statements may favor, oppose or state any

interest in the proposed project. Amendments to the state-

ments may be permitted by the department at any time, but in

no event later than the close of the last day of the hearing.
* ~Such statements shall become part of the record of the

hearing unless proper objection shall be made thereto. If

661. 17
661. 18

-51-

no hearing is held, such statements shall become part of the

department's official file.

Section 661.18 Public Hearings; decisions after public

hearing; decisions without public hearings.

(a) (1) A public hearing shall be commenced not less

than thirty and not more than sixty days after the receipt

of a complete permit application by the regional permit

administrator.

(2) The public hearing shall be conducted by a

hearing officer designated by the commissioner. The hearing

officer shall have full authority to control the conduct and

procedure of the hearing, including but not limited to the

power to provide for the taking of testimony by deposition,

to admit or exclude testimony or other evidence, to rule on

all motions and objections, to require and fix the time for

filing of briefs and other documents as to facts and law, to

direct the parties-in-interest to appear and confer to

consider the simplification of the issues by the consent of

the parties-in-interest, to set the time and place for

continued hearings, and to administer oaths and affirma-

tions. Furthermore, the hearing officer shall have the

authority to sign and issue subpoenas in the name of the

department, requiring attendance and giving of testimony by

witnesses and the production of books, papers and other

661. 18

-52 -

documentary evidence. Said subpoenas shall be regulated by

the civil practice law and rules.

(3) The hearing officer shall be responsible for

maintaining a complete -record of the hearing. The depart-

ment may use recording devices to keep such record.

(4) The hearing shall be conducted expeditiously

and shall, insofar as practicable, continue from day to day

exclusive of holidays and weekends.

(5) The public hearing shall be held in the

county where the affected wetland or adjacent area is

located. Insofar as practicable, the public hearing shall

be held in the municipality where the affected tidal wetland

or adjacent area is located.

(b) (1) The parties-in-interest to the hearing shall

be the applicant, the department, each municipality in which

the affected tidal wetland or adjacent area or any portion

thereof is located, those persons who file timely notices of

appearance as required by the hearing notice, as specified

in section 661.16, and any person who does not file such a

notice of appearance but appears at the hearing and states a

significant interest in the proposed project which should in

the hearing officer's opinion be represented in the hearing

in spite of such person's failure to file a timely notice of

appearance.

661.18

-53-

(2) Persons who are not parties-in-interest may

be allowed to participate in the hearing where the hearing

officer finds that such participation would be in the public

interest. In the hearing officer's discretion any person

may make an oral statement at the hearing in favor of, in

opposition to or expressing an interest in the proposed

project.

(3) All parties-in-interest shall be afforded an

opportunity to present oral and written arguments on issues

of law and policy and to present oral and written evidence

and argument on issues of fact; provided, however, the

hearing officer may exclude any such evidence as he deter-

mines will be irrelevant or unduly repetitious.

(4) All testimony at the hearing shall be sworn

under oath or affirmed under penalty of perjury.

(5) The hearing officer shall permit the parties-

in-interest to cross examine witnesses but may limit such

cross examination to avoid the introduction of irrelevant or

unduly repetitious material in the record of the hearing.

(6) The strict rules of evidence shall not apply

to such a hearing; provided, however, that all privileges

provided by the law and constitutions of the state of New

York and the United States shall be given affect.

(7) Objections to evidentiary offers may be made

and shall be noted in the record of the hearing.

661. 18

-54-.

(8) All evidence, including records and documents,

in the possession of the department of which it desires to

avail itself shall be offered and made a part of the record,

and all such documentary evidence may be received in the

form of copies or excerpts or by incorporation by reference.

In case of incorporation by reference, the materials so

incorporated shall be available for examination by the

parties-in-interest before being received in evidence.

(9) The hearing officer may take official notice

of all facts in which judicial notice could be taken and of

other facts within the specialized knowledge of the depart-

ment. When official notice is taken of a material fact not

appearing in the evidence in the record and in which judicial

notice cannot be taken, every party shall be given notice

thereof and shall on timely request be afforded an oppor-

tunity prior to decision to dispute the fact or its materiality.

last day of the hearing; provided, the hearing officer may

extend the end of the hearing to allow parties to submit

such briefs and memoranda as he may direct.

(d) The hearing record shall include: all notices,

pleadings, motions and intermediate rulings; evidence

presented; a statement of matters officially noticed except

matters so obvious that a statement of them would serve no

useful purpose; questions and offers of proof, objections

661. 18

-55-

0 ~~thereto and rulings thereon; proposed findings and exceptions

if any; and any decision, determination, opinion, order or

report which may eventually be rendered by the hearing

officer or the commissioner as a result of the hearing.

(e) Within thirty days after receipt of the transcript

of the hearing and all briefs and memoranda which were

timely filed as directed by the hearing officer, the hearing

officer shall make a written recommendation based on the

hearing record and supported by substantial evidence as to

whether the application filed by the applicant should be

granted, denied, or -ranted with conditions. In making such

recommendations, the hearing officer shall recommend rele-

vant findings of fact and conclusions of law and shall

recommend which conditions, if any, be attached to a permit,

if granted. Findings of fact, if set forth in statutory

language, shall be accompanied by a concise explicit state-

ment of the underlying facts supporting the findings. If,

as requested by the hearing officer in accordance with the

provisions of this part, a party-in-interest submitted

proposed findings of fact, the hearing officer's written

recommendations shall include a recommendation with regard

to each proposed finding. The findings, conclusions and

recommendations of the hearing officer shall comprise the

hearing officer's report. Immediately upon completion of

such report, such report and the remainder of the hearing

* ~~record shall be forwarded to the commissioner.

661.18

-56-

(f) After receiving the hearing officer's report and

the remainder of the hearing record, the commissioner may

require further information from any of the parties-in-

interest. In any case where such additional information is

so required, all parties-in-interest shall be afforded an

opportunity to review such additional information and

respond thereto within not more than thirty days of receipt

of written notice that the department has received such

information. Any party-in-interest may request that the

hearing be reopened for the purpose of examining such

information; and upon such request the hearing may be

reopened and shall be conducted as set forth in this Part.

The commissioner shall either: grant the permit requested,

with or without conditions, deny the application, or order

the hearing to be reopened.

(g) The decision by the commissioner to issue or deny

a permit or to order the hearing to be reopened shall be

made in writing within thirty days of his receipt of the

hearing officer's report and the remainder of the hearing

record; provided, however, in the event the commissioner

requests additional information pursuant to subdivision (f)

above, such thirty day period shall begin on the last day

set for responses to the additional information by parties-

in-interest or, in the event of a reopened hearing, after

receipt of the hearing officer' s report and the remainder of

661.18

-57-

the hearing record following the reopened hearing. Such

decision shall be based on the hearing record and shall be

supported by substantial evidence. Such decision shall

state the findings and reasons on which it is based and

shall contain findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Findings of fact, if set forth in statutory language, shall

be accompanied by a concise and explicit statement of the

underlying facts supporting the findings. If a party-in-

interest submitted proposed findings of fact as requested by

the hearing officer, the commissioner's decision shall

include a ruling upon each proposed finding.

(h) The applicant shall pay the costs of the public

hearing, including the following costs:

(1) a stenographer;

(2) one or more copies of the record of the

hearing for the use of the department;

(3) costs of required publication; and

(4) rental of physical accomodations for the

holding of the hearing, if not held in department facili-

ties.

(i) (1) If no timely notice of appearance stating

specific grounds of objection to the proposed regulated

activity relevant to the findings and determinations required

of the department under this Part has been filed as provided

in the notice of hearing and the applicant waives in writing

661. 18

-58-

any public hearing on his application, the regional permit

administrator may dispense with and cancel the public

hearing. In such event, an official file shall be compiled

by the regional permit administrator consisting of documents

submitted by the applicant and any additional documents

relied on by the department with respect to the application.

The department may also utilize its owrn experience, technical

competence, resources and specialized knowledge and any

resources available to it and may take notice of general,

technical or scientific facts within the specialized knowledge

of the department. Any document made part of such official

file shall be available for inspection by the applicant and

any interested member of the public.

(2) The regional permit administrator shall grant

the permit requested, with or without conditions, deny the

application, or order a hearing to be held pursuant to this

Part.

(3) The decision by the regional permit adminis-

trator to issue or deny a permit or to order a hearing shall

be made in writing within thirty days of the complete

compilation of the official file and in any event within

ninety days of his receipt of a completed application. Such

decision shall state the findings and reasons on which such

decision is based and shall be filed in the official file.

661. 19
661. 20

-59-

Section 661.19 Notice of decision to grant or deny

permit application.

(a) A copy of the decision of the department to grant

or deny an application for a permit under this Part, and any

permit granted, shall be mailed or delivered immediately

following such decision to the applicant and to his attorney

of record, to the chief administrative officer of each

municipality which the affected tidal wetland or adjacent

area or any portion thereof is located, or his designee,

and, if a public hearing has been held regarding the application,

to each party-in-interest and to the attorney of record of

each such party.

(b) A notice of such decision shall be published in

the publication required pursuant to section 3-0306(4) of

the environmental conservation law.

Section 661.20 Relationship to SEQR and the Freshwater

Wetlands Act.

(a) The review procedures required pursuant to the

state environmental quality review act (SEQR), article eight

of the environmental conservation law, will apply as of

September 1, 1977 to certain activities subject to the

permit requirements and notification letter provisions of

this Part. With regard to any permit application or noti-

fication letter under this Part, the applicant may be

661. 20
661.21

-60-

required to submit information necessary for compliance with

SEQR in addition to that information required under this

Part.

(b) In the event any area regulated under this Part is

also subject to regulation pursuant to the freshwater

wetlands act (article 24 of the environmental conservation

law) such area shall be subject to the provisions of this

Part and of the freshwater wetlands act and rules and regu-

lations and local ordinances and laws adopted pursuant

thereto. Provided, no area which is treated as a tidal

wetland pursuant to this Part shall be deemed to be a

freshwater wetland under the freshwater wetlands act.

Section 661.21 Pending moratorium permit applications.

(a) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Part,

the following shall apply in those instances in which a

petition for a moratorium permit under 6 NIYCRR Part 660 was

received by the department prior to the effective date of

this Part, which petition proposes an activity subject to

the permit provisions of this Part, and regarding which

petition the department did not issue a final decision prior

to the effective date of this Part:

(1) If a public hearing pursuant to Part 660

regarding such petition has not or will not be held, such

petition shall be treated in all respects, including but not

661. 21

-61-

limited to the filing of a new application, or where appro-

priate the submission of only additional necessary infor-

mation as determined by the regional permit administrator,

as an application for a permit authorizing a regulated

activity under this Part.

(2) If a public hearing pursuant to Part 660

regarding such petition has been commenced or completed

prior to the effective date of this Part, such petition

shall be reviewed and a decision shall be made by the

department pursuant to all of the criteria for review of

petitions under Part 660, including but not limited to the

petitioner' s showing of hardship as of the completion of the

hearing. Provided, however, upon submission of an appli-

cation under this Part, or where appropriate the submission

of only additional necessary information as determined by

the regional permit administrator, the activity proposed by

the petitioner may be treated in all respects as a regulated

activity under this Part.

(3) If a moratorium permit is granted under this

subdivision, it shall be treated under this Part in all

respects as a moratorium permit issued pursuant to Part 660.

(b) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Part,

in those instances in which a petition for a moratorium

permit under 6 NYCRR Part 660 was received by the department

prior to the effective date of this Part which proposes an

661. 21
661.22

-62-

activity subject to the notification letter provisions of

this Part and regarding which petition the department did

not issue a final decision prior to the effective date of

this Part, such petition shall be treated in all respects as

a notification letter under this Part.

in those instances in which a petition for a moratorium

permit under 6 NiYCRR. Part 660 was received by the department

prior to the effective date of this Part which proposes an

activity which is an incompatible use under section 661.5 of

this Part for the area involved and regarding which petition

the department did not issue a final decision prior to the

effective date of this Part, such proposed activity shall be

treated in all respects as a new regulated activity under

this Part.

Section 661.22 Duration of permits.

(a) The date of expiration of any permit issued pur-

suant to this Part shall be not more than ten years from the

date such permit was issued.

(b) The expiration date of any permit issued pursuant

to this Part may be extended by the chief permit adminis-

trator for good cause shown upon a written request to him

filed prior to the expiration date. Any such extension may

not exceed one year in duration.

661. 22
661. 23
661.24

-63-

issued pursuant to this Part may authorize the undertaking

of a regulated activity on a periodic basis, but the dura-

tion of any such permit shall not exceed the period of time

allowed by subdivisions (a) and (b) of this section.

Section 661.23 Bond.

In any case the commissioner may, upon written findings

and reasons, require that prior to commencement of work

under any permit issued pursuant to this Part the permittee

shall post a bond with the department in an amount deter-

mined by the commissioner, conditioned upon the faithful

compliance with the terms of such permit and for the indem-

nification of the state for 'restoration costs resulting from

failure to so comply. Such a bond shall be issued by a

corporate surety authorized to do business in the state of

New York and shall be in favor of the department. Such bond

shall remain in effect until the department certifies that

the work has been completed in compliance with the terms of

the permit or the bond is released by the department.

Section 661.24 Modification of permit and decisions.

(a) Following the issuance of a permit, minor modifi-

cations of such permit may be made by the chief permit

administrator where:

661.24

-64-

(1) additional pertinent facts, circumstances, or

conditions not considered in the department's decision to

issue the permit are made known to the department, or the

applicant requests minor modifications in the department's

permit and/or decision,

(2) a written request justifying such modifica-

tions is submitted to the chief permit administrator, and

(3) such modification will not be contrary to the

policy or provisions of the act or of this Part.

In considering whether to make such requested modifica-

tions, the chief permit administrator, where appropriate in

light of the request, may provide notice of such request and

opportunity to comment to the chief administrative officer,

or his designee, of each local government in which the

affected tidal wetland or adjacent area or any portion

thereof is located and to all other parties-in-interest, may

order the reopening of a hearing, if held, or may order the

scheduling of a hearing pursuant to this Part.

In cases where the chief permit administrator doubts

that proposed modifications are minor or that such modifica-

tions are consistent with the policy and provisions of the

act or of this Part, he shall either, as appropriate in

light of the request, order the permittee to file a new

application pursuant to this Part, schedule a public hearing

pursuant to this Part, or reopen a public hearing held

661. 24

-65 -

regarding the permit involved.

(b) Within thirty days following a decision by the

department to deny a permit un~der this Part, the applicant

may request the commissioner to reconsider the decision.

Until such time as the commissioner makes a final disposi-

tion of the request for reconsideration, such a request for

reconsideration shall be deemed to stay the time specified

by the act for a person to seek review of, or make an appeal

from, a determination by the department pursuant to the act.

The commissioner may reconsider such a decision where:

(1) additional pertinent facts, circumstances,

conditions or arguments not considered in the department' s

decision to deny the permit are made known to the department;

and

(2) a written request justifying such reconsid-

eration is submitted to the department.

Prior to the commissioner's reconsideration of such

decision, the commissioner shall order that the public

hearing held on the subject permit application be reopened.

If no hearing was held on said application, the commissioner

may, prior to his reconsideration of the decision, order

that a public hearing be scheduled on the subject appli-

cation pursuant to this Part.

661.25

-66-

Section 661.25 Revocation or suspension of permits.

(a) A permit may be suspended or revoked by the

commissioner at any time upon one or more of the following

grounds:

(1) materially false or inaccurate statements

were made in the application or supporting papers; or

(2) the permittee has failed to comply with the

terms of the permit or the scope of work set forth in his

application.

(b) The commissioner shall send a notice of intent to

suspend or revoke a permit to the permittee by mail or shall

cause such notice to be delivered in person by a duly

authorized representative of the commissioner. Such notice

of intent to suspend or revoke a permit shall state the

findings and reasons which would warrant such intended

actions.

the notice of intent to suspend or revoke his permit, submit

a written statement to the commissioner setting forth the

reasons why the permit should not be suspended or revoked.

Failure to submit such a timely statement shall result in

the automatic suspension of the permit, effective on a date

specified in said notice of intent. Upon receipt of the

permittee's statement, the commissioner may rescind the

notice of intent to suspend or revoke the permit if he so

661.25

-67-

determines based on the information provided by the permittee,

or he may suspend such permit effective upon delivery of a

notice of suspension to the permittee by mail or by personal

service, which notice of suspension shall state the commis-

sioner's reasons and findings for such suspension.

(2) The permittee may be required, at his own

expense, to serve the parties-in-interest with copies of his

statement as to the reasons why the permit should not be

suspended or revoked.

(d) If the commissioner has not rescinded the notice

of intent to suspend or revoke pursuant to paragraph (1) of

subdivision (c) of this section, the commissioner shall

within thirty days of issuing said notice of intent cause an

administrative hearing to be held regarding the issues

raised by such notice. The procedures by which the adminis-

trative hearing is held shall be governed by section 661.18

of this Part relating to public hearings, except that only

fifteen days notice prior to the hearing need be given and

except that the hearing officer's report shall include

written recommendations as to whether the permit should be

suspended or revoked or reinstated with or without changes

in conditions.

(e) Within ten days of his receipt of the hearing

officer's report and the hearing record, the commissioner

shall:

66 1.25

-683-

(1) reinstate the permit, with or without changes

and conditions;

(2) suspend or revoke the permit, including where

the commissioner determines appropriate an order to remove

or modify all or any portion of a project, whether completed

or not;

(3) continue the suspension already in effect by

operation of paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of this

section; or

(4) in lieu of suspension or revocation, rein-

state the permit, with or without changes in conditions,

where the applicant as a condition precedent to the rein-

statement of the permit, removes or modifies those portions

of the project whether completed or not which were not

carried out in conformity with the originally-issued permit

and which the commissioner deems necessary to remove or

modify.

Notice of such decision, stating the findings and reasons

therefor, shall be provided in the same manner as a notice

of decision pursuant to section 661.19(a).

(f) If the commissioner finds that the public health,

safety or welfare imperatively requires emergency action,

and incorporates such finding in an order to the permittee,

the commissioner may order summary suspension of a permit,

effective on the date specified in such order or upon

661.25
661.26
661.27
-69-

service of a certified copy of such order on the permittee,

whichever shall be later, pending proceedings for suspension

or revocation as set forth in subdivisions (a) through (e)

of this section.

Section 661.26 Determination that lands do not involve

littoral zone or coastal shoals, bars or flats.

The commissioner may amend an inventory map pursuant to

the procedures set forth in section 661.27 where he deter-

mines that certain lands under tidal waters, while possessing

the physical characteristics of littoral zone or coastal

shoals, bars or flats, are not littoral zone or coastal

shoals, bars or flats or any other type of tidal wetlands

because such lands do not function biologically as tidal

wetlands, exhibit little primary productivity and are

populated by few benthic organisms, due to such factors as

pollution, sedimentation or other physical disturbances.

The commissioner may take such action on his own motion or

at the request of any person. Such a request shall set

forth the specific boundaries of the proposed amendment and

the necessary information on which a decision on the request

may be made.

Section 661.27 Inventory map: maintenance and amend-

ments.

(a) The commissioner shall supervise the maintenance

6 61. 27

- 70-

of each inventory map, and all such maps shall be available

at the appropriate regional office of the department for

public inspection and examination.

(b) Upon request by any person or upon his own initia-

tive, the commissioner may amend any inventory map or maps

under the following circumstances and in the following

manner:

(1) after public hearing, any amendment to add a

new tidal wetland to an inventory map, to significantly

expand or detract from the boundaries of a tidal wetland

shown on such map, to delete a wetland from such map or to

alter the classification of a wetland shown on such map as

may be necessary to conform such maps to actual on-site

conditions;

(2) notwithstanding paragraph one of this sub-

division, any amendment as may be necessary to reflect such

natural changes as have occurred since the effective date of

the inventory map, as originally established or as amended,

through erosion, accretion or otherwise or to reflect such

other changes as have occurred since such effective date as

a result of granting permits under this Part; any amendment

to clarify the boundaries of any tidal wetland shown on an

inventory map, to correct any minor errors on the map or to

effect other technical changes on the map; or any amendment

to affect minor changes pursuant to section 661.26, without

661. 27

-71-

a public hearing unless the commissioner determines that a

public hearing is appropriate;

(b) of this section shall provide any person an opportunity

to support, oppose or make a statement of interest in the

proposed amendment of an inventory map and shall be held in

the following manner:

(1) The department shall prepare a proposed

amended inventory map for each area in which the comm-is-

sioner is considering amending an inventory map. Such map

shall be made available for public inspection at the appro-

priate regional offices of the department at the time the

hearing notice provided for in paragraph two below is given.

(2) The commissioner shall give notice of such

hearing to each owner of record of all lands designated on

the proposed amended inventory map as a new tidal wetland

which may be added or a tidal wetland whose boundaries may

be amended and also'to the chief administrative officer, or

his designee, of each municipality within whose boundary any

such wetland or portion thereof is located, by mail not less

than thirty days prior to the date set for such hearing.

The commissioner shall also cause notice of such hearing to

be published at least once, not more than thirty days nor

fewer than ten days before the date set for such hearing, in

at least two newspapers having a general circulation in the

661.27

-72-

area where such wetland is located.

(d) After considering any facts which may be deemed

pertinent and the testimony given at the public hearing, if

a hearing is held, and after considering the rights of

affected property owners and the policy and purposes of the

Act, the commissioner shall establish by order the final

bounds of each tidal wetland that will be added or whose

boundary will be amended on an inventory map. A copy of the

order, together with a copy of the inventory map depicting

such final boundary lines, shall be filed in the office of

the clerk of the county in which is located all or any

portion of such wetland. The commissioner shall simul-

taneously give notice of such order to each owner of all

lands designated in the order as a tidal wetland which has

been added or whose boundary has been amended by mailing a

copy of such order to such owner. The commissioner shall

also simultaneously give notice of such order by mail to the

chief administrative officer, or his designee, of each

municipality within whose boundary any such wetland or

portion thereof is located. The commissioner shall also

cause a notice of such order to be published in at least two

newspapers having a general circulation in the area where

any such wetland is located.

conform to the requirements of section 202 of the state

administrative procedure act.

661.28
661.29
-73-

Section 661.28 Measurement.

Any measurement required in this Part shall be measured

horizontally unless otherwise specified.

Section 661.29 Tax assessment.

As soon as practicable following the effective date of

this Part the department shall file with the tax assessment

office of each municipality in which any tidal wetlands are

located a copy of the provisions of this Part, a copy of

each inventory map that includes any area within the bound-

aries of such municipality, and a copy of the following

notice:

"Section 25-0302(2) of Article 25 of tile Environmental

Conservation Law, which article is known as the Tidal

Wetlands Act, requires that the placing of any tidal

wetlands under a land use regulation which restricts

its use be deemed a limitation on the use of such

wetlands for the purpose of property tax valuation in

the same manner as if an easement or right had been

acquired under the general municipal law and that

assessment be based on present use under the restricting

regulation. The enclosed land use regulations were

promulgated by the department of environmental con-

servation pursuant to section 25-0302(1) of the Tidal

Wetlands Act."

661. 29
661. 30

-74-

As soon as practicable following any amendment to the pro-

visions of this Part, the department shall file a copy of

such amended provisions with the tax assessment office in

each municipality in which any tidal wetlands are located.

As soon as practicable following any amendment to an inven-

tory map, the department shall file a copy of such amended

map with the tax assessment office of each municipality

within whose boundaries the amended map applies.

Section 661.30 Joint proceedings under other laws and

regulations.

(a) In the event that an applicant for a permit issued

pursuant to this Part is also required to apply for a permit

pursuant to any other Part of Title 6 NYCRR, the regional

permit administrator, the chief permit administrator or

other official before whom such application is pending shall

insofar as possible process any or all such applications in

tine same proceeding as is held pursuant to this Part. In

the event of any procedural inconsistencies between this

Part and such other Part, he may insofar as permitted by

statute follow the procedures of either Part for any and all

such applications.

(b) The commissioner may, by mutual agreement with any

municipality within whose boundary the affected tidal

wetland or adjacent area or portion thereof is located or

661. 30
661. 31
6 61. 32
-75 -

any other federal, state or local body having jurisdiction

over the subject matter of the application for a permit or

any work related to such subject matter, provide for joint

processing of any application under this Part with any

application for a permit or other processing required by

such municipality or body, including provisions for joint

notices and hearings.

Section 661.31 Other laws and regulations; other

permits or approvals.

41o provision of thi Part shall relieve any person from

his obligation to comply in all respects with the provisions

of any other federal, state or local law or regulation,

including but not limited to acquisition of any other

required permit or approval.

Section 661.32 Emergency activities.

Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Part, this

Part shall not apply except as provided in this section to

any actual and ongoing emergency activity which is immedi-

ately necessary for the protection and preservation of life

or property or the protection or preservation of intrinsic

resource values. Such emergency activities include, for

example: search and rescue operations; and preventive or

remedial activities related to large-scale contamination of

661. 32
661. 33

-76-

streams or otner bodies of water, floods, hurricanes and

other storms, and public health concerns. Within ten days of

the end of such an emergency involving the undertaking of

any activity which otherwise would be treated as a regulated

activity or an activity requiring a notification letter

under this Part, the person chiefly responsible for under-

taking such emergency activity shall send a written state-

ment to the regional permit administrator setting forth the

pertinent facts regarding such emergency, including an

explanation of the life, property or resource values such

activity was designed to protect or preserve.

Section 661.33 Jurisdictional inquiries.

(a) If a person is uncertain whether a proposed

activity is subject to the provisions of this Part, he may

request the regional permit administrator to make a deter-

mination as to whether the permit or notification letter

provisions of this Part apply to such activity.

(b) If a person desires the determination requested in

(a) to be made in writing, such request shall be made in

writing and shall contain all information deemed necessary

and appropriate by the regional permit administrator to make

such determination. Within fifteen days after receipt by

said administrator of such written request and all such

information, he shall notify such person by letter whether

661. 33
661.34

-77-

his activity is subject to the permit or notification letter

provisions of this Part.

Section 661.34 Violations; penalties.

(a) Administrative sanctions. Any person who violates,

disobeys or disregards any provision of the Act, including

but not limited to any provisions of this Part or any permit

issued pursuant to this Part, shall be liable to the people

of the state for a civil penalty of not to exceed three

thousand dollars for every such violation, to be assessed,

after a hearing or opportunity to be heard, by the comnmis-

sioner. The penalty may be recovered in an action brought

by tire commissioner in any court of competent jurisdiction.

Such civil penalty may be released or compromised by the

commissioner before the matter has been referred to the

attorney general; and where such matter has been referred to

the attorney general, any such penalty may be released or

compromised and any action commenced to recover the same may

be settled and discontinued by the attorney general with the

consent of the commissioner. In addition, the commissioner

shall have power, following a hearing held pursuant to

section 71-1709 of the environmental conservation law, to

direct the violator to cease his violation and to restore

the affected tidal wetland or area immediately adjacent

thereto to its condition prior to the violation, insofar as

661.34

-78-

that is possible within a reasonable time and under the

supervision of the commissioner. Any such order of the

commissioner shall be enforceable in an action brought by

the commissioner in any court of competent jurisdiction.

Any civil penalty or order issued by the commissioner under

this subdivision shall be reviewable in a proceeding under

article seventy-eight of the civil practice law and rules.

(b) Criminal sanctions. Any person who violates any

provision of the Act, including but not limited to any

provision of this Part or any permit issued pursuant to this

Part, shall, in addition, for tile first offense, be guilty

of a violation punishable by a fine of not less than five

hundred nor more than one thousand dollars; for a second and

each subsequent offense he shall be guilty of a misdemeanor

punishable by a fine of not less than one thousand nor more

than two thousand dollars or a term of imprisonment of not

less than fifteen days nor more than six months or both. In

addition to or instead of these punishments, any offender

shall be punishable by being ordered by the court to restore

the affected tidal wetland or area immediately adjacent

thereto to its condition prior to the offense, insofar as

that is possible. The court shall specify a reasonable time

for the completion of the restoration, which shall be

effected under the supervision of the commissioner. Each

offense shall be a separate and distinct offense and, in the

661.34
661.35
661.36
-79-

case of a continuing offense, each day's continuance thereof

shall be deemed a separate and distinct offense.

Section 661. 35 Enforcement.

The attorney general, on his own initiative or at the

request of the commissioner, shall prosecute persons who

violate the Act, including but not limited to any provisions

of this Part or any permit issued pursuant to this Part. In

additon the attorney general, on his own initiative or at

the request of the commissioner, shall have the right to

recover a civil penalty of not to exceed three thousand

dollars for every violation of any of these provisions of

this Part, and co seek equitable relief to restrain any

violation or threatened violation of these provisions and to

require the restoration of any affected tidal wetland or

area immediately adjacent thereto to its condition prior to

the violation, insofar as that is possible, within a reasonable

time and under the supervision of the commissioner.

Section 661.36 Judicial review.

Any person aggrieved by the issuance, denial, suspen-

sion, or revocation of a permit may within thirty days from

the date of the commissioner's order seek judicial review

pursuant to article seventy-eight of the civil practice law

and rules in the supreme court for the county in which the

tidal wetlands or adjacent areas affected are located.

MEMORANDUM

THE FRESHWATER WETLANDS INVENTORY
(Task 7.1)

Prepared by

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Office of Program Development, Planning and Research
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12233

The preparation of this report plus accompanying maps was
financially aided through a Federal Grant from the Office
of Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and Atmospher-
ic Administration, under the Coastal Zone Management Act
of 1972.

This report plus accompanying maps was prepared under the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 for the Division of
State Planning, Department of State.

May 12, 1976

Grant Number: 04-5-158-50002

FRESHWATER WETLANDS INVENTORY

Introduction

The following is a summnary of the wetlands inventory being undertaken by DEC

pursuant to the State's Freshwater Wetlands Act of 1975 and with the incorpo-

ration of the Coastal Zone Management Program into the inventory process.

The effect of the CZM program's involvement with the inventory (Task 7.1 of

the 1st year CZM program) has been to alter the priorities for mapping and

data interpretation. The goal is now to concentrate on completing all coastal

zone county U.S.G.S quads by the end of the second year of the CZN program.

As of May.1, 1976 the U.S.G.S. quadslisted following this summary have had

transparent overlays prepared. The Data-Take-Off process, which essentially

is responsible for producing items IP 2, 3 and 4 under "Inventory Products" is

just getting underway for the Tug Hill region, part of which contains several

coastal zone counties.

Reasons for Concern Over the Preservation of Wetlands

Ecological transition zones such as wetlands are often of value to living things,

because of the relatively easy availability of food and cover within a relative-

ly limited area. Wetlands are especially productive of living things because

needed nutrients, water and light are usually present in high quantities. Very

few habitat types - even including intensively cultivated crop lands - can match

the biological productivity of wetlands. This combination of conditions makes

wetlands of unparalleled value as a habitat type for fish and wildlife,,

-2-

Two-thirds of the marine fish and shellfish commercially harvested are said to de-

pend upon the marsh-estuarine system of the tidal wetlands at some point in their

* ~life cycle. Many fresh water fish ,are similarly dependent. Wetlands provide the

spawning ground for pike, pickerel and muskellunge. They are the nurseries for

young largemouth bass, and are important throughout this species' life cycle. Sun-

fish, perch, bullheads, carp, minnows and other species use the wetland habitat.

No habitat type provides the variety, visibility, and density of wildlife that

wetlands provide. Many species are directly dependent upon wetlands, while others

are associated with wetlands to varying degrees. Over two dozen amphibians, in-

cluding salamanders, frogs, and toads, are found in New York State. Some ten species

of turtles in New York use wetlands. These include the endangered bog turtle which

is found only in certain specialized wetland habitats. Several species of snakes

are also dependent upon wetlands. Scores of water birds including loons, grebes,

herons, rails, plovers, sandpipers and other shore birds, would not be found in

New York in the absence of wetlands. Raptors are common in wetlands and three

species - the bald eagle, the osprey and the peregrine falcon - which are rare or

endangered are almost directly dependent upon wetlands. It hardly needs stating

that without wetlands there would be no waterfowl. Less often realized is the de-

pendence of most of the furbearers on wetlands. Muskrat, beaver,, mink,, and otter

are directly dependent while raccoon and red fox are closely associated. Wetlands

also provide critical winter cover for pheasants. Both big game species in New

York State - the white-tailed deer and especially the black bear- are associated

with wetlands to a degree often overlooked.

When these enormous fish and wildlife values of wetlands are compared to the

relative rarity of wetlands in New York State (one to two percent of the state's

-3-

surface is wetlands) and to the vulnerability and fragility of wetlands (enormous

losses of wetlands have occurred on Long Island, along the Hudson River, along

the lake plains from Syracuse to Buffalo, and elsewhere), the reason for the

Department of Environmental Conse~rvation' s concern becomes obvious.

Reasons for the Wetlands Inventory

The Freshwater Wetlands Act calls for the study and mapping of freshwater wetlands

throughout the State, a prime reason for continuing the inventory which actually

began before passage of the act.

Fortunately, the wetland habitat type is highly amenable to a management program

such as called for in the Wetlands Act or other legislation relating to land use,

the environment, etc. (i.e., the Coastal Zone Act). "tManagement program"-~here

is intended in its broadest sense, to include land use planning, environmental

impact analysis, protective and other legislation, acquisition, education, land-

owner contacts, cooperation with local planning, governing and environmental

agencies, evaluation and measurement of changes, research, and habitat restoration,

enhancement and manipulation practices. Such a program must have an adequate data

base: an inventory of the wetlands of the State. An inventory of land resources

such as wetlands is needed to plan land use. Detailed inventory information is

needed to analyze environmental impacts. An inventory will guide the drawing up of

protective legislation and regulations such as those to be formulated as part of

a coastal zone management program. It will help to assure that wetlands acquisition

is done in the most systematic and efficient way. It will aid enforcement. It will

provide data needed for research. When repeated periodically it will measure changes

in quality and quantity of wetlands and will identify critical problems.

-4-

. ~Who is Doing the Inventory

The Bureau of Wildlife in the Division of Fish and Wildlife (New York State Depart-

ment of Environmental Conservation) is the agency responsible for the inventory,

with considerable financial assistance being provided by the Federally - funded

coastal zone management program. The general design of the inventory is by the

Bureau of Wildlife,. with cooperation and participation in design and/or implementa-

tion by the following: in airphoto interpretation, which is the comprehensive and

most systematic phase of the inventory, and the phase that will be most useful to

other agencies, by the Resource Information Laboratory, Department of Natural Re-

sources, New York State College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, Cornell University;

in field data collection for the large wetlands, valeious agencies and especially

the regional field staffs in the Department of Environmental Conservation; in soils

interpretation (still in the planning stages), the Soil Conservation Service, U.S.

Department of Agriculture.

Information Being Collected

All wetlands 1/5 hectare or larger are being mapped. Wetlands 2� hectares and

larger are being located according to a modified universal transverse mercator grid

system, and being assigned to county, town, city or village. Association with a

lake, watershed or estuary is being measured in both spring and summer. Perimeter

measurements and measurements of length of contact with rivers, streams, lakes

and land are being made. Beaver activity, surrounding land use, human influ-

ences, are a few, among other, types of information being recorded for all wet-

lands 212 hectares and larger.

On still larger wetlands (approximately 20 hectares or more) additional informa-

tion is being collected, including suitability for acquisition, soils interpretation,

vegetative classification, water alkalinity, known vegetation, fish and wildlife,

and enhancement potential.

Inventory Products

1. Transparent overlays of U.S.G.S. 7�' topographic sheets on which wetlands 1/5

hectare or more will be mapped by cover type through airphoto interpretation.

2. An area-by-area paper file which will include airphoto, field, land use, and

soils data. An airphoto data sheet is being prepared for each wetland 2? hec-

tares or larger. Other data will be incorporated for wetlands of larger size or

higher priority.

3. A computer file in which much of the data in the paper file will be stored.

All of the airphoto> interpretation information and most of the other information

will be in numerical form so that it can be stored in computer.

4. A summary, on a topo-sheet-by-topo sheet basis, of the areas under 2� hectares.

These wetlands will not have separate data sheets for each of them.

Quads Completed

As of May 1, 1976, the following U.S.G.S. quads for the coastal zone counties

have had transparent overlays prepared on which wetlands 1/5 hectare or larger have

been mapped by cover type (i.e. wet meadow, flooded deciduous trees, etc.). These

sheets are available for reproduction.

Hudson River Coastal Zone Counties

Rennselaerville 1944 Cementon 1963 Claverack 1945-60
Durham 1943 Hudson South 1963 Napanoch 1942-56
Greenville 1945 Shandaken 1945-60 Canaan 1946-59
Prattsville 1945 Phoenicia 1945-60 Bearsville 1945

-6-

Ashland 1945 Woodstock 1945 Arena 1945
Hensonville 1945 Willowemoc 1966 Seager 1945
Freehold 1945 Claryville 1966 Hyde Park 1963
Leeds 1953 Peekamoose Mtn. 1943-69 Woodridge 1966
Fleischmanns 1945 West Shokan 1942-69 Ellenville 1942-69
West Kill 1945-60 Ashokan 1964 Gardiner 1942-57
Lexington 1945-60 Kingston West 1964 Wurtsboro 1943-69
Hunter 1945 Kingston East 1963 Kerhonkson 1942-69
Kaaterskill 1943 Grahamsville 1966 Mohonk Lake 1964
Lawbeach 1945 Rondout Reservoir 1942-69 Rosendale 1964

Eastern Lake Ontario Coastal Zone Counties (Oswego and Jefferson)

Central Square 1966 Copenhagen 1942 Ellisburg 1958
Sandy Creek 1958 Mallory 1957 Adams 1959
Boylston Center 1953 Mexico 1956 Sackets Harbor 1959
Worth Center 1966 Dugway 1957 Watertown 1959
Rodman 1959 Pulaski 1956 Carthage 1943
Barnes Corners 1959 Richland 1958 Deferiet 1949
Rutland Center 1959 Redfield 1960 Black River 1958

Other Lake Erie and Lake Ontario Coastal Zone Counties

All quads in Wayne and Ontario Counties are mapped.

MEMORANDUM

TIDAL WETLANDS INVENTORY
(Task 7.1)

Prepared by

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Office of Program Development, Planning and Research
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12233

This report plus accompanying maps was prepared under the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 for the Division of
State Planning, Department of State.

May 12, 1976

Grant Number: 04-5-158-50002

TIDAL WETLANDS INVENTORY

Background

New York State undertook an inventory of its tidal wetlands after the 1973 State

Legislature added a new article to the Environmental Conservation Law (Article

25), the Tidal Wetlands Act. The Act was effective September 1, 1973.

In acting to preserve the tidal wetlands, the State acknowledged the vital part

wetlands play in the coastal ecosystem. Among the contributions of wetlands

are the following:

Food Production - At some point in their life cycle, two-thirds of the commercially

harvested fish and shellfish and two-thirds of sport fish depend on the

marsh estuarine system of the tidal wetlands.

Wildlife Habitat - Tidal wetlands are essential breeding, nesting, and feeding

grounds for many forms of wildlife, waterfowl and shore birds.

Flood and Storm Control - The hydrologic water absorption and storage capacity of

wetlands minimize erosion and flooding damage. Wetlands serve as a natural

buffers protecting upland and developed areas from storm tides and waves.

Recreation - Wetlands provide hundreds of square miles for hunting, fishing, boat-

ing, hiking, birdwatching, photography and camping. Wetlands comprise a

large part of the remaining natural and unspoiled areas along the crowded

coastal reaches of the State and provide unique open space and esthetic

qualities.

Natural Waste Disposal - Wetlands are valuable and irreplaceable biological and

* ~~chemical oxidation basins in which organic runoff and organic pollution are

oxidized, metabolized and converted into useful nutrients. Wetlands are

essential settling and filtering basins absorbing silt and organic matter

which otherwise would obstruct channels and harbors to the detriment of

navigation.

-~Education and Research - Wetlands afford a wide range of opportunity for scientific

research and outdoor laboratories and serve as a living educational classroom.

Economic Benefits - Wetlands also provide direct economic benefits. For example,

Great South Bay alone creates direct economic benefits of an estimated

$152,000,000 per year from sale of clams, boats, marine equipment, and fish-

ing equipment.

The State's basic policy in the Act was to preserve this valuable resource and

allow for the maximum use of the remaining wetlands along New York's coastline.

In order to effectuate this policy, the Act provided for an inventory showing

the location,, extent, and categories of tidal wetlands so that effective planning

for their protection could begin. The need for the inventory and protection of

wetlands was apparent from the fact that in the past twenty years, more than

12,000 acres of Long Island wetlands were lost to bulkheading, dredging, filling,

dumping, excavating, and similar operations. Continued losses on this scale would

soon have resulted in the disappearance of much of the remaining wetlands.

Performance of the Inventory

The Department elected to obtain the services of a private contractor to conduct

the inventory. Earth Satellite Corporation was awarded the contract. Mark Hurd,

Aerial Surveys, Earth Sat's subcontractor, was responsible for aerial photo ac-

quisition and base map production.

The principal tasks involved in implementing the inventory were the following:

acquisition of aerial photography (color infra-red transparencies) for New York

City, all of Long Island, and parts of Westchester and Rockland Counties; prepara-

tion of photobase maps through enlargement and rectification of the aerial photo-

graphs; delineation of wetland boundaries and categories on the photobase maps

through analysis of aerial photographs and field -verification; acquisition

-3-

of property ownership information from examination of tax maps, and

notification of owners of lands delineated as within the wetlands; public

hearings to allow review of the maps by affected landowners; revision of

maps as necessary from the comments at the public hearings; and preparation

of final map products.

The aerial photographs were acquired by Mark Hurd, Aerial Surveys, and were de-

signed to serve as: (a) a photobase upon which the wetland boundaries would be

displayed, and (b) the primary information source for the identification and

delineation of the tidal wetlands.

The photographs were analyzed by natural scientists from the staff of Earth

Satellite Corporation. These scientists have extensive experience in the appli-

cation of aerial photographs to wetland identification and mapping. Wetland

categories identified on the photography were delineated on the photobase maps

and labeled with appropriate symbols.

Following the initial wetland delineation, owners of property mapped as tidal

wetlands were identified from review of county and municipal tax records. The

Department will notify owners of record that their land has been mapped as wet-

land as required by the Act. Property owners are given the opportunity to examine

the wetland maps and review the placement of the boundary lines at a public hearing.

Final map products are prepared and filed with the appropriate Department of Con-

servation Regional Office subsequent to the public hearings and will be used as

a primary information source in implementing the permanent rules and regulations

formulated to protect and preserve the State's coastal resources.

The Area Inventoried

The area to be covered by the New York Tidal Wetland Inventory was determined by

DEC to be those wetlands which receive regular and identifiable tidal flows, ex-

cepting those areas identified as being formerly connected tidal wetlands. This

includes all of Long Island and the neighboring islands off the eastern tip, Staten

* ~Island, Manhattan Island, the mainland of Westchester County along the northwestern

shore of the Long Island Sound, and that portion of the Hudson River lying within

the State of New York as far north as the Tappan Zee Bridge. The project area in-

cludes the counties of Suffolk, Nassau, Westchester, Rockland, Kings, Queens,

Richmond, New York and the Bronx.

Information Being Collected

All tidal wetlands inventoried were categorized as follows based on vegetative

cover and/or tidal flow: intertidal marsh, high marsh in salt meadow, coastal

fresh marsh,, coastal shoals, bars and mudflats, formerly connected tidal wet-

lands and a littoral zone.

The minimum required mapping of a category within a wetland was five acres.

Inventory Products

(1) Color IR photography of the inventory area

(2) A reproducable screened Cronaflex photo base map which is a composite

of the image photo base and inked on wetland delineations at a scale

of I" =200'

(3) A plasticized photographic print of the above Cronaflex

(4) Lists of landowners of wetlands

As of this writing, all but 35 maps of a subsequent order have been received.

With this exception, the entire inventory has been completed.

Interim Report
on

(TASK 7.2)

-Flood Plain Management

1,5 Beach Erosion and Hurricane Damage Reduction
South Shore Long Island

Prepared by

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Office of Program Development, Planning and Research
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12233

The preparation of this report was financially aided through
a Federal Grant from the Office of Coastal Zone Management,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, under the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.

This report was prepared under the Coastal Zone Management
Act of 1972 for the Division of State Planning, Department
of State.

February 25, 1976

Grant Number: 04-5-158-50002

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Forward.Pg

* ~Introduction ..1............................
Existing Development..........................2
Value..................................2
Preserving and Enhancing Coastal Zone Uses............... 3

Methods of Shore Protection ........................4
Beach Protection Projects....................... 4
Jetties................................ 5
Others................................. 5
Flood Protection Projects....................... 5

Existing Beach Erosion Control and
Hurricane Protection Programs .......................6
Structural Protection......................... 6
The State-Local Programs........................ 6
The Federal Programs.......................... 6

Land Use and Development Controls..................... 7
Preservation and Protection...................... 7
Regulation of Development in Hazard Areas............... 8
Regulation of Building Construction.................. 8
Other Methods............................. 8

The Federal Flood Insurance Program.................... 8
Other Non-Structural Measures......................9
Hurricane Preparedness Plans ......................9
-Improved-Hurricane-Forec~asts ......................9

Fire Island National Seashore .......................10

Gateway National Recreation Area......................14

Evaluation of Reaches...........................
Reach I - Staten Island: Fort Wadsworth - Arthur Kill .........16
Reach 2 - Narton Point to Rockaway Inlet (Coney Island Area) ......21
Reach 3 - Rockaway Inlet to East Rockaway Inlet.............29
Reach 4 - East Rockaway Inlet to Jones Inlet ..............35
Reach 5 - Jones Inlet to Fire Island Inlet ...............40
Reach 6 - Fire Island to Moriches Inlet.................46
Reach 7 - Moriches Inlet to Shinnecock Inlet ..............53
Reach 8 - Shinnecock Inlet to Beach Hampton...............59
Reach 9 - Beach Hampton to M~ontauk Point ................64

References.................................66

* ~~Appendix..................................67

Interim Report

Flood Plain Management

Beach Erosion and Hurricane Damage Reduction

South Shore - Long Is land

Forward

This preliminary report is intended only as a starting point for an inter-

change with land use planners engaged in the Coastal Zone Management Program.

It is hoped that the report, together with more detailed and additional in-

formation as may be required, will assist in the delineation of land use

plans for the coastal zone. Such a land use plan would permit detailed

recommendations for an erosion and hurricane damage reduction management pro-

gram to be developed in the next phase of the study.

Introduction

Erosion of beaches and flooding of low lying coastal areas are natural

phenomena. Man, at least at present, has little control on the enormous

forces of wind and tide that form and shape and alter coastlines. Man can,

however, have great influence on how and where damages occur to the environ-

ment of the shore and to his pursuits and occupation of flood and erosion prone

areas. Management of shore areas consists of planned actions, or inactions,

that preserve or enhance the value of the coastal zone. The difficulty, of

course, lies in first, the present development and use of the coastal zone

area, particularly those uses subject to large potential damages, second, in

determining the value (including any resultant damages) resulting from a given

use and, third, determining the best way to preserve or enhance coastal zone

values.

Existing Development

Present development patterns range from the Fire Island National Seashore

to very intensive commercial harbor development. Exposure to potential

damage ranges from very low to enormous. Where large potential damages

are present, the traditional response has been to provide protection

for the fixed and committed investment. Such a policy may cause many

problems. Protection works are expensive, and may produce adverse

effects to adjoining areas. Protection facilities may work to perpetrate

unwise development patterns and even encourage further unwise development.

However, the danger to life and property, damage to public facilities

and dislocation to area economies, especially from occurrence of a major

hurricane, fully justifies current Federal and State policies providing

for assistance to local governments in protecting existing developments.

The difficulty of the problem dictates that consideration be given to

all possible methods of reducing damages including purchase, relocation

and land use controls to try to provide better solutions.

Value

The problem in determining value lies in the impossibility of assigning

a common system of measurement, such as dollars, to all values. It is

exceedingly difficult to compare the value of a salt marsh to a commercial

harbor. This question is important to a discussion of erosion and flood

damage reduction because the type of land use determines the methods

available and the costs of damage reduction methods (including environmental

and other damages caused by protection methods) must be included in the

costs of utilizing a site for a specific purpose.

-3-

This "endless rope" problem requires estimating costs of alternative

uses of coastal areas for the land use planner for his use in the

designation of land use areas. The land use plans are then used to

prepare a detailed plan for beach erosion and hurricane damage

prevention.

Preserving and Enhancing Coastal Zone Uses

Methods of preserving and enhancing coastal zone values range from

protecting and preserving areas by limiting use to transitory visits,

through land use controls establishing set backs and construction

standards, to sand nourishment schemes and culminating in vast engineered

structures such as those used in the Netherlands to reclaim and hold

land from the bed of the sea. Quite obviously methods used for a

national seashore are unsuitable for a commercial harbor. Equally

obvious is that the more intensive the use for a specific area, the

more expensive the construction operation and maintenance of a damage

reduction program, the more the environment may be affected and the

more risk of catastrophic loss should protective works fail.

The general process of erosion and flooding are well established and

reasonably well understood along the south shore of Long Island. The

process that cause changes in limited shore sections or during intense

storms is much less understood. Neither does the state of scientific

knowledge permit a vigorous analysis or prediction of the exact action

of protective devices. Design of shore protection systems is therefore

subject to substantial uncertainty and professional disagreement. This

situation dictates that planning and management should be done on

-4-

broad reach basis, with sufficient flexibility to deal with specific

problems as they arise.

Methods of Shore Protection

The -natural defense against the destructive forces of waves and flooding

are the beaches and dunes along any coastline. The wide gently sloped

beaches dissipate wave energy and reduce erosion forces while the dune

at the back of the beach acts as a barrier or natural levee to protect

against flooding. In general, shore protection facilities are designed

to stabilize, restore, replace or. supplement the natural beaches and

dunes .

Beach Protection Projects

Sandfill, the most commonly used method of beach protection or restora-

tion, is the placement of beach fill by artificial means. The sand for

the beach fill is obtained from offshore sources, back bays or navigation

inlets-, and pumped hydraulically to the beach site. Other mechanical

means are also used, such as trucking or barging the material to or near

the fill site and rehandling to build the desired beach slope.

Groins are often used to maintain and stablize an existing beach or to

build new beaches by trapping sand which moves in the long-shore current.

Groins are constructed of timber, rock or concrete and depending on the

design purpose, can be classed as high or low, long or short and permeable

or impermeable. They are usually constructed perpendicular to the beach,

running from the back shore to some predetermined distance into the

littoral zone of sand movement, depending upon the purpose of the structure.

Groins which are designed to interrupt the sand movement do so at the

-5-

expense of the adjacent downdrift shore until equilibrium is reached.

Down-drift effects must be considered and accommodated by allowing

* ~for some method of sand bypassing or downdrift protection.

Jetties

A jetty is a similar structure to a groin which also interrupts the

alongshore movement of sand. The construction is similar but usually

larger and longer and used to eliminate or control sand deposition

in a navigation inlet or channel by stopping the movement of sand

updrift from the navigation facility. The same downdrift effect on

sand movement occurs as with groins. To eliminate undesirable down-

drift erosion, the entrapped sand may be bypassed around the inlet to

allow for the continuation of natural nourishment of the beach areas.

Various methods of sand bypassing are employed.

Others

other structures for beach protection, such as offshore breakwaters,

or floodwalls, are considered but usually have limited applicability

on Long Island's south shore, primarily because of the relatively large

costs associated with such facilities.

Flood Protection Projects

Flood protection methods employed are designed to protect, restore,

supplement or replace the natural dune line behind the beaches. Dune

restoration is generally accomplished by hydraulically pumping the sand

to the site and shaping the structure by mechanical means. Dune stabliza-

tion is accomplished by various means, to prevent against wind destruction,

-6-

such as planting beach grasses and shrubbery and installation of sand

fencing. Protection of the dune base or toe is sometimes required by

construction of an armoring device such as a seawall or revetment.

Where a dune line is non-existant or lost due to development, flood-

walls and levees are utilized. Artifial barriers which either partially

or completely close an inlet may be constructed to insure continuous

protection from flooding for low lying backshore or back bay areas

within a specific geographic area or reach.

Existing Beach Erosion Control and Hurricane Protection Programs

Structural Protection

The State-Local Program

The State and local government program was initiated in 1945 by State

statute. This authority provides for construction of shore protection

facilities by the State, and requires local participation. Projects

are constructed by the Department of Environmental Conservation on lands

owned by a municipality (or beach erosion control district). The munici-

pality must repay 30 percent of the construction cost and maintain the

project after completion. Because of current Federal involvement in

this program area, the State-local program is currently limited to pro-

viding interim protection in Federal study areas or in areas where Federal

involvement is not warranted.

The Federal Programs

The Federal government, through the U. S. Corps of Engineers, participates

in several beach erosion control and hurricane protection programs. In

general, the projects are constructed by the Federal government, with non-

-7-

Federal interests providing lands needed for the project, a portion of

construction costs and maintaining the project after completion. The

State contributes 70% of the non-Federal construction costs and the

remainder of non-Federal costs, lands and maintenance are furnished

by the participating local government.

Hurricane Protection projects are funded 70% by the Federal government.

Beach erosion control projects are funded from 0 - 75% by the Federal

government depending on land use and ownership. Combined projects are

cost-shared using both programs and in New York average 50 to 60%~ Federal.

Land Use and Development Controls

Land use and development controls are designed (1) to preserve natural

features that tend to provide protection, (2) regulate development in

hazard areas, and (3) to provide that structures in flood hazard areas

are constructed to be reasonably safe from flood damage. A number of

land use control mechanisms are in use or have been proposed for this

purpose,

Preservation and Protection

Along most of the south shore of Long Island, -nature will provide a beach-

* ~~dune configuration that provides substantial protection. If the dunes

and nature are damaged or destroyed, this protection is lost. Most areas

on Long island have ordinances limiting construction and traffic on

beaches and dunes and protecting dune vegetation. These ordinances are

very effective when rigorously enforced.

Regulation of Development in Hazard Areas

Zoning and sub-division ordinances regulate the uses for which land

can be used and the manner of its use. These ordinances can provide

for limiting development in flood hazard areas and proscribe minimum

elevations and setback distances to provide reasonable protection.

These controls are most useful for new construction or reconstruction

and are of limited value for existing development.

Regulation of Building Construction

Building codes can provide for the use of construction methods and

materials that resist flood damages.

other Methods

A number of other methods such as development easement, relocation of

structures and tax policies are of value in specific cases.

The Federal Flood Insurance Program

Flood insurance provides no reduction in damages, but does provide a means

for recovering losses by property owners. However, the Federal Flood

Insurance Program requires land use control measures from a local coimmunity

as a condition of eligibility. New York City and almost all Long Island

conmmunities have joined the Federal program and agreed to adopt and enforce

the required land use controls.

-9-

Other Non-StrticturnT Mpasures

Non-structural measures such as hurricane preparedness plans,

improved hurricane forecasting and the Federal Flood insurance Program

can be useful in reducing damages from tidal flooding during severe

storms and hurricanes. These measures are largely dependent on local

* ~~authoriti ed effective implementation.

a. Hurricane Preparedness Plans

Areas such as the flood-prone areas of New York City should have

contingency plans for warning the public of approaching storms and

for evacuating residents of low-lying areas to higher ground. in

areas that are densely developed, evacuation plans are complex and

adequate advanced warning is necessary. For example, time is needed

to notify the public; to call in extra police, firemen, etc., and to

explain evacuation routes. Goods and equipment must be moved to

upper flors and windows and doors sandbagged.

b. Improved Hurricane Forecasts

The National Weather Service as part of its responsibility for

improved weather services in connection with major storms and

hurricanes, has established a "severe weather" network along the

Atlantic Coast., utilizing powerful radarscopes. Radar installations

at Nantucket, Atlantic City and Cape Hatteras are part of the network

linked to the Weather Service Office in New York City by means of

teletype communication. During periods of hurricane threat, the

New York City Office issues warnings to the public over several

powerful radio and television stations in the metropolitan area.

Tidal gages at the Battery and Willetts Point have been remoted to

the Weather Service Office in New York City, providing continuous

data on tida levels.

-10-

Fire Island National Seashore

Fire Island is considered a prime natural resource. Much of

it remains undisturbed by man, in spite of its location less than 60

miles east of New York City. Because of the Island's extensive unspoiled

natural landscapes and the unique recreational opportunities they accom-

modate, Congress authorized the Secretary of the Interior to establish

a national seashore on Fire Island in 1964.

The enabling legislation (FL 88-587) defines the boundaries

of the national seashore to include the area "from the easterly boundary

of Robert Moses State Park wastward to Moriches Inlet, a distance of

about 26 miles, as well as various nearby islands in adjacent bays, and

the waters surrounding said area to distances of 1,000 feet in the

Atlantic Ocean and up to 4,000 feet in Great South Bay and Moriches Bay."

(see Figure __) The Seashore is divided into a seashore and a develop-

ment district. Twenty communities on the western end of the Island

(referred to as exempted communities) constitute the development

district. The exempted communities are: Atlantique, Cherry Grove,

Corneille Estates, Davis Park west of Brookhaven Town Park, Dunewood,

Fair Harbor, Fire Island Pines, Fire Island Summer Club, Kismet (Light-

house Shores, Kismet Park, Seabay Beach), Lonelyville, Ocean Beach,

Ocean Beach Park, Point O'Woods, Robbins Rest, Saltaire, Seaview and

Water Island.

Total acreage within the boundary is 19,311, with about 5,278

being above mean high tide. There are four landowning interests within

the Seashore boundaries: the National Park Service (2,692 acres);

Suffolk County (about 1,212 acres); private landowners in 20 exempted

communities (1,113 acres) and private inholders with existing Federal

tracts (40 acres) and local municipalities on Long Island (about 166

Ca~~d --, *?4

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IV
..-Z\ , ..

~~OORICHES'

ST .UARD-'
M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~MR
T ASTIST J C B EA C -H? tJ . ~ i

COUNTY P ARK~

_ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -, * ' -~~~~~~CUS OU BEACH

ur~~~~~~o",Ln .MORICES
UB .SMITH ~ -----------~REAT GUN BEACH, MONHE _ N ET~

PARK MORICHES INLET-UNIT

Figure I

~ini y Map
Ind National Seashore.,
*NEW YORK 140Ot

411 5 S

-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A 1

~._

INT,

'., -,

4.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I

POIN /T WE,91.is~

RI(; 'ATC HILL UE ~NTW

J ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FRIE PLACEBECH HCLUB OL L BELOTB CLUB
w~~m iv Wm=mum Itm scmu 11 mmmi a == . ~mmx~ ra &x swm" X

WATCH HILL UNIT~~~~~~~~~~~~ OLD INLET U NT N-co
~ ~Cu.T ARK
k -C~~~~~~~~';C;'~ ~~~

ot.,~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-,a,-". ________________
FiRE~~~~~~c PLCpECHCUaLnILTCU
mu 4 a 4~a~S~a~ina ins~ ~ ~ - -~ ~ a ~ 12 n ad

tl'

CO1ETU-

STAE ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A & Is,.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~Z 4' ~
'N N-
PATCH(~~~~~~~5

PARX- -1~ /-

-'--'7~ ~~V TAIS 8A'C Q. S!E

----------~~~.-'-~--,------- &Xzuz*pf-"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L a

A7-eo V ILL,,, kANO7-

*~~ ~ ~~~~~ COUNTY
Acm ~ ~ */
"s A' W,, ITHN IC
"0*2~~~~~ 01'-c /IL U .ABy A

-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~m1 ST'q
~~~~~~~.PARK ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ N Os! ?I-

T - - ~~~~~~~~ ***%RtkTYAT:R -1i -*~*
-~~~ ,-' ~~~~~--~~~--~~~z~~- ~~~ -. -.~ ~ - R
B~~~~~iY~~-~

-, ~~~ -, -~~~A*U ON

~~~~~~7-~. 7A.SH . .-....

-~~~~~~~~~ "Ji'

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~WS-FR IS LAND\

-,~~~~~~~6

CR ONSERAC --
"ATUR TLANTIQUE
-~~~ TE- PAR F
LONELYVILL

~~~>N.>.~AR ARO

* -~~~~~ - -,~~~~~~*%-., CAPT~~~~~~~~~REESTAT-ARC

~~~~~~~~~~WETFIRE ISLAND UILN

_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Up M M EAS Ft__-

LIGHETHOUSES ATRACTQU BEAC

-~~~~~~~~QO STATE PARK

b~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -~~~~~~~~~~~~4

... 4- --
~~ ~ ~ EASTISLIP I~~~~~~~

NSERVANCY ~ OSEVAC'
* *A~ ~ / ~ 4AURE-.-,4.

~~~SE-ONISLRANDYyK'~-
EAiFR I SLAND
re~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ WOO go'ii'No

G~~~~~A -ROBBINS c-~

04 L ET E.7
SALTJ REST ---BEA,

CAPTR~~~~~~~ATATEU Is TATE AR

RACT S UNKEN ~ FORES USLN IT \.

~~~~DEVEASET DISREISCTN r F/IVT LA%
1~~~~~~I wt-4-PAR..-- N A

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~EX -PIAE-ID 4--IC

-vv- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '

-11-

acres) and Fire island (55 acres). The National Park Service lands

have been acquired since the enabling legislation was passed, principally

through direct negotiations with private landowners. Congress appropri-

ated $16 million for this purpose. The Act also provides for transfer,

exchange and donations of land. The Park Service may acquire certain

lands through condemnation.

The Secretary may acquire, without consent of the owners, such

lands as are necessary for public access to the beach, but may not

acquire other lands, without consent, where compliance with "a duly

adopted, valid, zoning ordinance that is satisfactory to the Secretary"

has been demonstrated. The Secretary is authorized to "issue regulations,

which may be amended from time to time, specify~ing standards that are

consistent with the purposes of this Act for zoning ordinances which

must meet his approval." Such standards may prohibit certain "new

commercial or industrial uses" and promote "the protection and develop-

ment... .of land within the national seashore by means of acreage, frontage

and setback requirements." A copy of these standards is appended to

this report. The Act states that such regulations must be incorporated

into provisions of local zoning ordinances, which will not be approved

by the Secretary if they contain "any provision that he considers adverse

to the protection and development... of the area comprising the national

* ~~seashore." These provisions give the Federal Government considerable

authority to regulate land use and development on lands within the

boundaries of the Seashore that have not yet been acquired. Only Islip

has complied with the law and formally submitted its zoning regulations

for adoption.

0 ~~~~~The Act specifically authorizes the Secretary of the Interior

to acquire property by condemnation in an approximately eight-mile area

-12-

from the easterly boundary of Davis Park to the westerly boundary of

the Smith Point County Park. Owners of property in this zone, on July 1,

1963, were given the option of life tenancy or up to a 25-year tenancy,

with appropriate compensation, in lieu of vacating the property and selling

it to the Federal Government. This zone and the Sunken Forest area are

accorded special protection from the incursion of roads and ecologically

incompatible uses.

As of November 1974, the National Park Service owned 2,692

acres of the fast lands within the Seashore boundary. This figure

represents about 51 percent of the land acreage, but only about 14

percent of the total acreage of land and water (19,311 acres). Most

Federally-owned lands were acquired during a six-year period following

passage of the enabling act in 1964. The National Park Service holdings

on Fire Island consist of four large bay-to-ocean strips totaling 1,639

acres and six smaller bay-to-ocean strips totaling 183 acres. All of

East Fire Island and its satellite islands (156 acres), as well as most

of West Fire Island (102 acres), are also Federal lands. In addition

to these lands, which were included within the originally legislated

boundary, the Seashore also includes the 612-acre William Floyd Estate

(added to the Seashore by an act of Congress in 1965), a historic main-

land property north of Moriches Bay near the eastern end of Fire Island.

The Department of the Interior has spent almost 99 percent

of the $16 million originally authorized for land acquisition and

purchases of interests in land. No additional funds have been authorized

for these purposes since the enabling act.

Except for a few residences that remain occupied under tenancy

options, residential structures and associated developments on Federally-

acquired lands are slowly being removed, and the lands either developed

for public recreational use or allowed to revegetate naturally.

-13-

The State of New York owns all lands and waters within the

authorized seashore boundary that are seaward of mean high tide. The

National Park Service has a use-and-occupancy indenture agreement with

the State of New York, to include the lands and waters extending 1,000

feet into the Atlantic Ocean from the mean high-water line between the

* ~~eastern boundary of Robert Moses State Park and Moriches Inlet, subject

to prior rights of ownership on adjacent uplands. The Federal Government

does not own the beach, the primary dune line, the marshlands, or other

unimproved lands on Fire Island that are outside the boundaries of its

existing holdings, and has no bay-bottom acreage, except for a small

tract at Sunken Forest. There are only two Federal areas on Fire Island

dev~eloped for recreation--Sunken Forest and Watch Hill--and four additional

tracts that are large enough to be developed--Talisman, the Federal lands

between Water Island and Davis Park, the Federal lands between Watch Hill

and Smith Point West, and the lands east of Smith Point County Park that

are proposed for acquisition by the Federal Government.

The National Park Service has recently issued a revised master

plan and an accompanying environmental impact statement for the Seashore.

The object of the master plan is to develop an environmentally sound

resource-management plan for Fire Island. A major proposal of the plan

is that the western boundary of the Seashore be redrawn along the western

edge of the community of Point 0'Woods. Fourteen of Fire Island's 20

exampted communities would be excluded. Since the Seashore's authoriza-

tion in 1964, the relationship between the National Park Service and the

20 exempted communities has remained ill-defined. Community zoning

regulations have been formulated, and reviewed by the Federal Government,

but variences have been created by the governing municipalities, leaving

the Government no recourse but condemnation--for which no funds are

-14-

available. (Reportedly, this boundary adjustment has been dropped from

consideration due to local community opposition)

Among other items proposed in the draft master plan are:

-- Installation of the already authorized sand-bypass systems at Moriches

and Fire Island Inlets, and authorization and installation of a sand-

bypass at Shinnecock Inlet.

-- Sand nourishment of eroding beaches throughout the Seashore.

-- Prohibition of all groins, bulkheads, revetments, and other artificial

beach-stablizing devices, and removal of all such existing structures

(except for inlet jetties) within the boundaries of the Seashore

prior to implementation of the above two proposals.

--Restoration or repair of the ocean-facing dunes as needed in front

of communities, and planting with native, perennial dune-stablizing

species to encourage revegetation.

The Department of the Interior has announced that it is

considering purchasing 500 acres of vacant, privately-owned land within

the Seashore boundary. The proposed Federal budget for Fiscal Year 1977

includes money for this purpose.

Gateway National Recreation Area

The Gateway National Recreation Area was established by

Congress in 1972 for the purpose of preserving and protecting, for the

use and enjoyment of present and future generations, an area possessing

outstanding natural and recreational features.

Four management units, three in New York State, have been

designated which correspond to the geographically separated land areas

that are joined by New York Bay (see Gateway map). The three units in

New York are:

The Jamaica Bay Unit, encompassing approximately 16,000 acres

of drylands, marshlands, and waters in and adjacent to Jamaica

-15-

Bay, includes the lands and facilities of the former naval

air station at Floyd Bennett Field (the present park head-

quarters site), the existing parklands at Dead Horse Bay,

Frank Charles Memorial Park, Plumb Beach, and Canarsie Beach

Park, and the Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge.

The Breezy Point Unit, South of Jamaica Bay on the western

end of Rockaway Peninsula, contains about 1,600 acres and 4-2

miles of ocean beaches, including Jacob Riis Park, the lands

and facilities at Fort Tilden, and the shoreline abutting

the Breezy Point Cooperative.

The Staten Island Unit, extending along the eastern shore of

Staten island, includes Great Kills Park, Miller Field, and

a portion of Fort Wadsworth, as well as two small man-made

islands, Hoffman and Swineburne--a total of more than 2,900

acres.

The fourth unit is located at Sandy Hook in New Jersey.

The Recreation Area is under the jurisdiction of the Department

of the Interior and is operated by the National Park Service. Land

acquisition for the Park has not been completed, particularly in the

Staten Island Unit. The Park Service has operated some four miles of

ocean beaches in the Breezy Point, Staten Island and Sandy Hook Units

the past two years.

An environmental assessment of the Park lands is currently

being prepared. It is expected to be completed in the spring of 1976.

No master plan has yet been prepared, but a draft alternatives report

is available.

BRN

4z- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ l

K I A~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7

N ~BROOLNX

UN~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IO

S ANDYHOOKTUNI

* ~~~~N.
ESSEX~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4 40 t UEEN
UN~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ITE-TTSDPRMN FTEITRORNTOA AKSRIEAG7 S

WESTCHESTER 0 N1

:2. I I 10 0 0 20 30 40M~~~~~~~~~A '

74* 73* 72~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A

Coastal Zone Management~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~X

Location at Reaches~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~N
LogIslndSuhhoeW
(inludngStaenYsad

Evaluation of Reaches

Reach I

Staten Island
Fort Wadsworth to Arthur Kill

-16-

REACH 1

0 Staten Island-Fort Wadsworth to Arthur Kill

I. General Description:

This reach covers the 13-mile southeastern shore of

Staten Island, New York City. It extends along the lower New

York and Raritan Bays from Fort Wadsworth at the Narrows -

to Tottenville at the mouth of the Arthur Kill.

The terrain along the shore ranges from high bluffs

near the west and east ends of the reach to low marshlands. Low,

narrow beaches front most of the area. Several tidal creeks,

some of which discharge through gated flumes, intersect the

shoreline.

Land use is primarily for recreational and residential

purposes. The City of New York owns about fifty percent of the

shoreline in this reach and maintains extensive bathing facilities

and parkland. Population growth on Staten Island has been

substantial in recent years, in large part due to the improved

access to Long Island provided by the Verrazano Narrows Bridge.

II. The Problem:

The problem along the southeastern shore of Staten

Island is a combination of shore erosion from wave attack and

inundation from storm tides. This has resulted in loss of life,

displacement of families and considerable property damage. The

hardest hit areas are between South Beach and Miller Field, and

Great Kills and Tottenville (see Figure 3 ).

A. Erosion

The shoreline of this reach has been generally stable

-17-

in recent years. However, large storms have caused severe

ero sion. This has resulted in a reduced beach width, exposing

waterfrait property to wave attack and reducing the area useful

for recreation.

Over the years, improvements for beach erosion control

and hurricane protection have been undertaken by the Federal,

State and local governments and private interests. Protective

works have consisted of artificial beaches built from sand

dredged from the bay, a number of groins, and a few walls,

bulkheads, dikes and revetments. The structures have been

largely effective in holding the shore and reducing the erosive

effect of the littoral currents. Yet, considerable sections

of the beach area, located seaward of the bulkhead and seawall

structures, have been lost to erosion.

The stability of the beach depends primarily on the

quantity of sand available to replenish losses from erosion

and the sand-transporting forces which act along the beach.

The quantity of littoral drift available is not great and

consequently the beach at a number of locations has been

unstable.

B. Flooding

The flooding problem is caused by hurricanes and large,

usually slow-moving extra-tropical storms which create tidal

flooding. Storm tides created by high winds and low barometric

pressure accompanied by wave action inundate large developed

areas with resultant property damage and dangers to health

and safety. Severe storms occur at a frequency of about twenty

every one hundred years and unusually severe storms have a

-18-

frequency of occurrence of five per one hundred years.

Hurricane Donna, which struck the New York City area on

September 12, 1960, produced the maximum flood height of

record. Damages on Staten Island from this storm were about

$3,160,000 (October 1960 prices).

An extra-tropical storm which occurred on March 6-8,

1972, produced damages of a lower dollar value than Donna.

However, damages to beaches and shore protection struc-

tures were greater. The damage consisted mainly of beach and

bluff erosion, and damage to bulkheads, seawalls, groins,

jetties, piers and marinas. Buildings also were damaged by

wave action and by flooding. There was considerable residen-

tial and public damage east of Oakwood Beach, including damage

to beaches and shore protection structures. A dike at Oakwood

Beach broke and caused inundation of a large residential area.

In the area from Great Kills to Tottenville Beach, the predom-

inant damage was to public facilities and from shore erosion.

Total damages from this storm were approximately $1 million.

Federal, State, local and private interests have built

protective works over the years which have offered a measure

of protection. However, the area is still subject to damages

from flooding which averaged one-half million dollars per year

in 1963. This would be equivalent to average annual damages

of about $1,280,000, December 1975 prices.

III. Protection Alternatives

The Corps of Engineers conducted a beach erosion control
1
and hurricane protection study in 1964 of this reach. The study

NOTE: References are listed on Page 89.

-19-

disclosed that the following improvements are economically feasible:

(a) combined shore and hurricane protection between Graham Beach

and Oakwood Beach and at Tottenville Beach; and (b) shore protection

at Great Kills Park and between Arbutus Lake and Sequine Point

(see Figure 3). Congress authorized this project in 1975.

Since the authorization, two modification alternatives

to the project were developed by the Corps of Engineers at the

request of the City of New York. The purpose of these alternatives

is to provide hurricane protection between Graham Beach and Fort

Wadsworth.

The City of New York has indicated a preference for one of the

two modification alternatives and the Corps of Engineers is

currently revising the project design accordingly. The project

under design (including the City-favored modification alternative)

generally consists of:

--Great Kills Park - 5,200 feet of beach fill

--Oakwood Beach to Graham Beach - 11,200 feet of beach fill

and 8,500 feet of backshore dune with a closure levee at

Oakwood Beach, pump stations.

--Graham Beach to Fort Wadsworth -14,300 feet of concrete I-wall,

pump stations, ponding areas.

--Arbutus Lake to Sequine Point -6,200 feet of beach fill and

a groin at Sequine Point.

--Tottenville Beach - 3,300 feet of dune and beach fill, one

groin.

To date, construction has not commenced on any part of

* ~~~~this project.

* ~~~~~-20-

A major portion of this reach, from Fort Wadsworth to

Great Kills Park, is located within the boundaries of the Staten

island Unit of the Gateway National Recreation Area. The National

Park Service, Department of the Interior, which manages the park,

is still in the process of acquiring lands within this unit. They

are currently formulating a general management plan for the park.

The plan is scheduled for completion in September 1976.

The National Park Service has not yet commented on the

proposed beach erosion control and hurricane protection project.

Since a major portion of the project area will likely be soon

under their jurisdiction, their concurrence and cooperation is

necessary for imnlementation of any project.

CORP OF NIE S I ARMY

Ai~

9 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 R,, ONY-

SA' 59001 *.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LAW ftICI4O..0 WE'I 110* *001I01~~~~~~~U
W~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~lL, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Vo PV11
O"Aslw R0OKIY d* sucocax'
'4,~~~~~~~~~~t

TRAYS~~~~~C3cmio "OILLS Ih*l.

N PONDING AR EA

its~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~p
TREATMNT PLAT CEOA E.,;

4ftR.S9.t*.%%l~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~WO A@I( UO OU~tO

6.0.1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~B~ AU hEKtH PIL
A=1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~LAhPL

Ol-OII S eat LAin iy t PILL

FOR DUNE! AND opACH FIL P01 HACH FILL JC

RARPITrANW i BA v TYPICAL GROIN PROFILES F LOOD 00 CONTROL PROJ~
I~~~1 114*11 11 IlL, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~STATEN ISLAND. NEW YORK
FORT WADSWORTH TO ARTHUR KILL
01004A. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~BEACH EROSION AND HURRICANE PROJECT

441~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 'GENERAL PLAN AND SECTIONS
-. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~JUNE 1970
\I.,~~~~ d~~c. "~~~~'~~~' SECTION 0? GROII~~~~~~~~~~ RICHMOND COU~~~~~~~tY NERIHMODYOUNT

UNION SCAM~~01*1500 C.."~W Nof B lrolf. NI.Y

REACH 2
Norton Point to Rockaway Inlet
(Coney Island Area)

-21-

REACH 2

Verrazano Bridge to Rockaway Inlet (Coney island -Area)

I. General Description:

This reach covers a six-mile length of the south shore

of Brooklynincluding the communities of.Sea Gate, Coney Island,

Brighton Beach and Manhattan Beach. It extends along the lower

New York Bay from Rockaway Inlet to Norton Point.

The terrain of the Coney Island area which lies to the south

of the Shore Parkway is relatively flat with ground elevations

generally less than 10 feet above sea level. North of the Shore

Parkway, ground elevations rise gently towards the north central

part of Brooklyn. The offshore water depths are shallow, less

than 20 feet below sea level, except for navigation channels and

dredged areas. There are several sandy beaches along the shore,

including Plumb Beach, Manhattan Beach Park, Brighton Beach,

Coney Island Beach and Sea Gate Beach. Most of the remaining

portion of the shore is either riprapped or bulkheaded. Rockaway

Point provides a considerable amount of protection against wave

attack to the shore of the Plumb Beach-Manhattan Beach area. The

East Bank shoal offshore of Coney Is land also provides a limited

measure of protection to the western part of this reach.

Land use is primarily for recreational and residential

use. Three-fourths of the shorefront facing the Atlantic Ocean

is owned by New York City. At the west end of the reach, along

Gravesend Bay and Coney island Creek, land use is mixed and

includes residential and commercial development, educational

facilities, public utilities, parkland and industry.

Continuing, around the west end of Coney Island, land

-22-

use is primarily residential in the community of Sea Gate, with

the exception of Lindbergh Park and Norton Point Lighthouse.

Along the south shore of Sea Gate is a private beach owned by the

residents.

On the south side of the communities of Coney Is land

and Brighton Beach is the most important recreational development,

the City-owned Coney Island beach and amusement area. The beach,

which includes a boardwalk and fishing pier, accommodates a peak

day attendance of over 400,000. Considerable areas of the Coney

is land community are undergoing redevelopment. The older tenements

are being replaced by high-rise apartment houses financed by the

Federal Government under its urban renewal program.

East of Coney island Beach along the shore, is Manhattan

Beach Park, also a public bathing beach. Between the two beaches

is a concrete esplanade in deteriorated condition. Continuing

eastward the shorefront development includes Kingsborough Community

College. On the north side of Manhattan Beach is Sheepshead Bay,

a renowned commercial fishing harbor. East of Sheepshead Bay is

the Plumb Beach portion of the City-owned Marine Park. This area

is generally undeveloped except for a marina on the north side of

Shore Parkway. A part of Plumb Beach south of Shore Parkway is

included in the Jamaica Bay unit of the Gateway National Recreation

area (see Figure 2).

II. The Problem:

The problem in this reach is a combination of erosion

and flooding. Shore erosion by wave attack causes damages to

shore structures and loss of protective beaches including the loss

of highly used recreational beach area. Tidal inundation occurs

-23-

during severe storms and hurricanes which results in considerable

property damage and hardships to hundreds of families located in

low-lying areas.

A. Erosion

The history of the Coney Island shoreline has shown

many advances and recessions over the last 140 years. The

general movement has been seaward with a migration of Norton

Point to the west. Between 1961 and 1970, the shoreline along

Coney Island and Brighton Beaches receded about nine

feet annually. This was primarily due to wave attack during

severe storms and inadequate nourishment available at the

Coney Island shorefront.

Several shorefront structures., including groins, bulkheads,

breakwaters and revetments, have been constructed by public

and private interests over the years to protect the shoreline.

Artificial nourishment in the amount of approximately 3,800,000

cubic yards of sand fill has been placed along Brighton Beach

and Coney island Beach since 1921. Recent beach fill operations

done by the City and the State in this area have greatly widened

the beach and provided a considerable increase in the recrea-

tional beach area.

B. Flooding

Hurricane Donna which occurred on September 12, 1960,

resulted in the maximum flood height of record, 8.6 feet above

sea level. It caused significant flooding at Coney island,

Brighton Beach, Manhattan Beach and along the Belt Parkway.

Damages were estimated at more than $1,3 million (1960 prices).

A recurrence of flood heights of the magnitude of Hurricane

-24-

Donna would cause an estimated $20 million in damages (July

1971 price levels). The extreme difference in the 1971 and

1960 figures is due to increased costs and the 1960 figure is

based on general chmage estimates.

The storm of March 6-8, 1962, although of lesser intensity

than Donna, caused severe erosional problems. Losses of more

than $2.5 million (1962 prices) were recorded from damage to

shore protection structures and from beach erosion.

The community of Coney is land suffered the greatest

residential and commercial damages in this reach. The entire

area between West 12th and West 37th Streets, with the excep-

tion of a few isolated areas, was completely inundated, with

ocean and bay waters meeting at depths of one to two feet over

the pavement. At the foot of streets abutting Coney Island

Beach, floodwaters left heavy depositions of sand up to two

feet deep from the eroded berm and shore of the beach.

In the community of Sea Gate, timber bulkheads were

overtopped with considerable damage to piling and sheeting,

as well as erosion of land fill. Landscaped areas were

inundated by storm water and there was flooding of basements

and walks. The Norton Point Lighthouse at the western end of

Sea Gate was subjected to loss of riprap anxi damage to land-

scaping.

In the Manhattan Beach area, the houses fronting the

southern shoreline were subjected to both wave attack and

tidal inundation. The wave attack caused great damage to

brick walls, porches and windows, and additional damage was

inflicted to the riprap revetment and concrete slab walkway

-25-

of the Esplanade. The ends of streets were flooded with waves

breaking over the Esplanade, and there was a significant loss

of land due to sand erosion.

Damage was slight in the vicinity of Sheepshead Bay and

along Gravesend Bay. However, at Plumb Beach in Brooklyn

Marine Park, storm damage consisted of shoreline erosion.

III. Protection Alternatives:

The Corps of Engineers in its Survey3 Study, examined

several alternatives of flood protection and beach erosion control,

including both structural and -non-structural methods. In order to

provide total protection against shore erosion and/or tidal inunda-

tion, alternative systems of structural works were formulated,

including single-purpose plans of protection providing beach erosion

control only, and hurricane protection only, and a multiple-purpose

plan of shore and hurricane protection. The single-purpose struc-

tural plan of protection against hurricane tidal flooding could

not be economically justified.

Several multiple-purpose schemes of providing protection

were examined by the Corps. It was found that protection against

hurricane tidal flooding could be economically justified by a

multiple-purpose plan which would include floodwalls, levees,

dikes, surge control and closure structures, interior drainage

works, beach restoration and terminal groins. During the plan

formulation,, strong support for hurricane protection works was

expressed by local authorities. However, at a public meeting

held at Coney Island in March 1972, a significant number of interested

parties voiced opposition to the considered multiple-purpose plan.

The basis of the opposition was that the structures would cause

-26-

impacts on aesthetic values and Possible degradation of water

quality and ecology.

Local participants in the 1972 public meeting generally

indicated a strong desire for the alternative single-purpose plan

providing only beach erosion control measures, which would signifi-

cantly reduce the existing overcrowded condition that occurs at

Coney Is land and Brighton beaches during the recreational beach

season.

The Corps of Engineers has developed several alternative

plans for beach erosion control based on varying the beach berm

width and alignment along Coney island and Brita ton beaches. The

alternative single-purpose plans for beach erosion control would

all provide adequate beach widths for shore protection (see Table 1).

Each plan consists of beach restoration between two terminal groins

to be constructed at the western end of Manhattan Beach and West

37th Street (see Figure 4). There is also provision for annual

beach replenishment in each plan. Plan II would provide the

greatest quantity of additional beach area, resulting in an

increase of 87 percent over the existing daily beach capacity.

This would significantly reduce the overcrowding that frequently

occurs during the bathing season. In addition, Plan II would

provide the greatest net benefits of the alternative plans

considered.

The Corps of Engineers contends that, based on the

current provisions contained in Public Law 84-826, as amended,

Federal participation in the cost of beach erosion control projects

* ~~~~is limited to restoration of the beach to the maximum seaward

historic shoreline, which, at Coney island, is 60 feet beyond the

TAIL! . SUCANY OF UMORUITION ON THE! ALTERNATIVE
SINGCL7.-1'tflP'5'3I SHOR rRMEC'TION PLANS
(January 1973 price levels)

Item ,ltn. .Pn_. Plan It Plan III Plan IV -

1"Fr'lrlton Reach 37 10560 5 10 460
St.r~e'.t.erier 1.30 510 760 710 660
V~eil 37th Street 130 210 460 .410 360
Ave rage, Inc rease in beach width (it) ..60 300 250 * 200
jr#!5h.Aret (sq. ft.)
Istc'red (.i) .-- 880.000 1,573,000 1,3511,000 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1.119,000
?:ev (b) - - - -. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2,765,000 2,304,000 1,866,000
Total beach 4.98.00 5.860.000 9,318.000 0.642,000 -7,967,000

I,,gre'l a - 3.2(16,000 4.710,000 42.,0 ,0.0
l!w b) .. . . . - 4,946.000 3.920.000 3,019,000
Tn; ' irst Cast ... 3,206,000 9,656,0(0 6,168.000 6,822,000

Into-eit srd Anioritlxation (d)
vi,.,red (A) -*189,300 278,200 250,900 224,600
,.,* (b) ... . . 292,200 .231,500 178,300
Total~~~- . . . - 189.300 570,400 4112,400 402,900
Periodic nourishment .335,000 335,000 335,000 335,000
P.internance 9,600 25.900 22,500 19,100
T0o:10 Wernae Annual Cost (e) 5* 33,"'Ao 911,300 839,900 .757,0f00

Add-LiOnAl Daily Beach Capacity (t)
Ited(a) -.23,500 42,000 36,200 29,800
*.u(b) - - 73,700 61,400 49,800
* ~~~~.)t41 132,800 . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~23,0a 115,700 97,600 7,0
Percel, in'!re'lla to daily beach . *-.17 B y 74 60

i~c~i~l'ini ~ use 342,200 14500,7200985,100
'.e~r~atiucl inirg -21,000 2 1,0Cl0 21,000 21.000
* l~~~~eduction !11 suorefC.Irot darlapes 162.800 162,800 162.1100 162,800
Ped~~rti'n in local nnlnrenanc. ... 98.000 ~~98,000 98,000 98,000
Trulil Average Ann',al Benefits . . . 624,000 1,626.800 1.454.200 1.266,900

Ne b"-,�f its (P.) - 89,700 695,100 .613.900 0,0
.2nefft/Co%t ftatio (a) - 1.2 1.1 7, .

(at, leacki are, joc-ated within the maximum seaward historic shoreline.
(ba) Bear, tlrva loca~ted beyond the tnaximum seaward historic shoreline.
(c) E~xcludes firs'. cant for aids to navigation estimated at $$.0oo.
(d Palled an an Interest rate of Sk percent and an economic life of 50 years.
*(a) Excludes annklal coat for sides to navigation estimated at $400.
(1) lased on 75 square feet per beach visotor and a turnover factor of two.
(g) Includes annual cost for aides to navigation.

9~61-rr-e~ flornB of EntytneerS

-27-

present shoreline. Accordingly, those costs associated with

contract work 60 feet beyond the present shoreline would be non-

Federal and must be absorbed by State and local interests.

New York State and the City of New York strongly support

Plan II and firmly believe that Federal participation in the full

project cost is warranted, and that limiting Federal participation

to the restoration of the Coney island historic shoreline will not

accomplish this purpose. Accordingly, the State and City have

asked Congress to examine this problem and to provide means for

full Federal participation in the cost of the project, including

those works associated with extending the beach seaward of the

historic shoreline. Local interests have also strongly expressed

their desire and support for Plan II, which is considered to be

the best plan, based on providing the greatest net benefits, and

satisfying the needs and desires of local interests by significantly

enhancing the social well-being of the Coney island Beach visitor

during the frequent periods of intense recreational beach demand.

Their support for Plan II is subject to Federal participation in

50 percent of the total cost of the project.

An exception to local support for the project is the

objections presented by the Sea Gate Association, a group consisting

of residents of the community of Sea Gate. The Association has

expressed fear that the terminal groin to be located at West 37th

Street at the west end of the project would cause erosion of the

privately-owned Sea Gate beach area to the west and would trap

pollutants from the Hudson River. All of the alternative beach

* ~~~~erosion control plans include the construction of a fillet of

beach on the west side of the West 37th Street groin. Authoriza-

-28-

tion of the project will permit examination of these allegations

* ~~~~in greater detail.

The Corps of Engineers, through the Secretary of the

Army, will recommend to Congress the authorization of Plan I,

based on the interpretation of Public Law 84-826 that limits

their participation in cost-sharing to the maximum seaward historic

shoreline. While this plan does not prnvide any significant

alleviation of the beach overcrowding, it does provide for:

(a) restoration of the recreational beach; (b) adequate protective

beaches; and (c) stablilization of the restored protective and

recreational beaches. The Corps will present information to

Congress on both Plans I and II.

It should be noted that neither Plan I nor II provides

any significant protection to the coastal areas within this reach

both east and west of the Coney Is land-Brighton Beach area. The

local opposition to a multiple-purpose hurricane protection and

beach erosion control project precludes any structural solutions

at this time.

The effectiveness of non-structural measures such as

zoning and building codes are limited because the area is highly

developed. The Coney island area, as part of New York City, is

participating in the Federal Flood Insurance Program. The area

undergoing urban renewal is subject to City zoning and building

codes which meet the requirements of the Flood Insurance Law.

Non-structural measures cannot prevent the loss of valuable beach

area during severe storms and replacement of sand is vital to this

* ~~~~already overcrowded beach.

It
~i~i~ .........'

C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C

a RAVES ENsD

BAY

NOR To N

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FCAA NE ONRNPOINT, N EW VA
CO.,,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CNYILAGND AREAS
A IV0 70CC E__AN
j~j- *r IU~A *t4Ah.*CA0C
r1~~~~~c..s. - -I~e h1 U.S Ci

*ca.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~O w nt -C CCACC
e~~~~~~iv~~~~~~~~s~~~~~wa.4.A A9 hi'O5O AP,,A NIAGOG

(D~~~~~~~/u -&:eK-
A T A/V T /

REACH 3
Rockaway Inlet to East Rockaway Inlet

-29-

REACH 3

Rockaway inlet to East Rockaway Inlet

J. General Description

This reach is about 10 miles long and includes the

Atlantic Ocean shoreline of Long Island and between Rockaway and

East Rockaway Inlets and Jamaica Bay. It is located entirely

within the City of New York except for about two miles of the

easterly shoreline of Jamaica Bay, which is located in Nassau

County.

The Rockaway Peninsula terrain is low and flat, with

elevations less than 10 feet above sea level at the western end,

rising to gently rolling hills between 20 and 25 feet above sea

level at East Rockaway. The Atlantic beach of the peninsula is

used entensively for recreation. The City of New York owns all

of the Atlantic shoreline from the Gateway National Recreation

Area boundary. Attendance at Rockaway Beach, owned by the City

of New York, was 21,000,000 in 1970. There is also a lengthy

boardwalk, amusement facilities and numerous private summer homes.

The Gateway National Recreation Area, Breezy Point Unit occupies

the western four and one-half miles of the peninsula.

Jamaica Bay is a large marshy area located north of the

Rockaway Peninsula. The bay is eight miles long and four miles

wide and covers an area of approximately 26 square miles. Large

portions of the north and east shores are bordered by marshlands

with small tidal creeks running through them. There has been

extensive development pressure on the fringes of Jamaica Bay and

over the years large areas have been filled and developed with

-30

private homes. John F. Kennedy International Airport is located

on the northeast fringe of the Bay. A portion of the Bay wetland has

been established as a wildlife refuge. A larger part of the Bay

is navigable. The Federal Government maintains channels along

the west, north and south perimeters of the Bay. Entrance to

the Bay is attained through Rockaway Inlet. The Inlet channel

is protected by a stone jetty extending seaward into the Atlantic

off Rockaway Point.

Jamaica Bay has become a unit of the Gateway National

Recreation Area, under the jurisdiction of the Department of

Interior, National Park Service. A management plan is being

developed by the Park Service. The estimated completion date of

the plan is the fall of 1976.

The mainland coastal area surrounding Jamaica Bay is

generally a low-lying level area. Several tidal creeks extend

into the interior from the Bay. The entire area is extensively

developed with private residences.

IT. The Problem

The problem in this section is a combination of shore

erosion from wave attack along the Atlantic coast of the Rockaways,

and inundation from storm tides from both the ocean and Jamaica

Bay.

A. Erosion

The entire ocean shoreline of Rockaway Peninsula

is a critical erosion area. A serious erosion problem has

* ~~~~~resulted from storms of unusually severe intensity in recent

years. These storms seriously reduce the width of portions

of the beach along the peninsula, thereby exposing existing

-31-

waterfront development to wave attack and causing a loss of

the beach area available for recreational use. The bulkheads,

seawalls, groins and jetties which have been constructed in

the area have been largely effective in holding the shore and

reducing the erosive effect of the littoral currents. Yet,

sizeable sections of the beach area, located seaward of

the bulkhead and seawall structures, have been lost by erosion.

B. Flooding

Hurricane Donna, which occurred on September 12,

1960 caused the maximum recorded water levels in this reach

of 8.6 feet above mean sea level. Over 3,500 acres of developed

land were inundated during this storm. Large sections of the

Rockaway peninsula and other communities fronting on Jamaica

Bay were affected by the flooding. Many streets on the low-

lying Rockaway Peninsula were flooded with three to four feet

of water. Large developed areas around Kennedy International

Airport were likewise inundated with three feet of water.

Although no lives were lost during this storm, hundreds of

families had to be evacuated from low-lying areas. Transpor-

tation, including use of the airport, was disrupted, and

utility service was disrupted. The storm caused an estimated

~15 million (1960 prices) of primary physical and non-physical

damage to the area.

Destructive storms are not atypical to the south

shore of Long island. Research of the period between 1701 and

1962 reveals that severe storms have occurred in this reach at

* ~~~~~a frequency of about 20 times in a 100-year period and unusually

severe storms at a frequency of about three times per hundred

years.

-32-

Ill. Protection Alternatives

The first significant attempt to protect the shoreline

in the reach dates back to 1926,2 although some isolated groins

were constructed as early as 1910. Between 1926 and 1930 a con-

siderable number of groins were built along the ocean front, with

the exception of the Rockaway Park area between Beach 109th and

Beach 126th Streets. After 1930, the major work has consisted of the

placement of a total of 6,625,000 cubic yards of sand along the shore,

and twenty more groins were constructed between 1943 and 1962. The

result is that, between Jacob Riss Park and East Rockaway Inlet,

there are few gaps in the groin system.

Approximately 25 percent of the shoreline surrounding

Jamaica Bay, including its tributary basins and branches, presently

contains waterfront bulkhead structures. Since the early 1920's

about 150 million cubic yards of material have been dredged from Jamaica

Bay, chiefly for the purposes of land reclamation, beach nourishment

along the ocean front, deepening and widening of navigation channels,

the manufacture of construction materials, and the creation of a bird

and wildlife sanctuary.

The Corps of Engineers conducted a "Cooperative Beach

Erosion Control Study and Interim Hurricane Study" of the area in

1964. It was recommended that a combined hurricane and beach erosion

control project be adopted for the reach. Specific recommendations in-

cluded:

--a 4,530 foot hurricane barrier across the entrance to Jamaica Bay

with a top elevation of 18 feet above mean sea level and with a

navigation opening of 600 feet to a depth of 42.5 feet below mean

sea level which can be partially closed by gates to 300 feet.

-33-

--about 1.2 miles of closure levees and dikes north of the barrier

at an elevation of 15 feet above mean sea level.

--about 0.6 mile of dike and levee and about 7.1 miles of flood-

wall extending easterly along the Rockaway Peninsula to tie in

with high ground at the eastern end of the peninsula (see figure

--artificial placement of about 4,000,000 cubic yards of beach

fill along the ocean shore between Jacob Rils Park and East

Rockaway Inlet.

--periodic beach nourishment, with Federal Government participa-

tion in the cost for the first 10 years after completion of

the beach fill.

The cost of the project is estimated to be between $150

and $160 million.

The project was authorized by Congress in 1965, with

the proviso that field studies and hydraulic model investigations

would be made in connection with the final design of the project

to determine the specific effects of the proposed hurricane barrier

on water quality, salinity and temperature patterns and currents

in Jamaica Bay and consequent effects on fish and wildlife, sewage

requirements and bottom scouring. Local interests also expressed

concern about the environmental effects that a hurricane barrier

wou~ld have on the ecology of the Bay.

Since numerous questions were raised regarding the effects

of the hurricane protection portion of the plan and because of

severe erosion of the ocean beach of Rockaway Peninsula by storms

in the late 1960's and early 1970's, the beach erosion control

part of the plan was separated from the hurricane portion.

-34-

Work is currently underway on the placement of hydraulic

sand fill of the ocean beach of the Rockaway Peninsula. In the

first increment of work, 3.0 miles of the 6.2 mile length of

shoreline in the project, between Bl10th Street and B46th Street

was completed in December 1975. The next increment is along 1.2

miles of shorefront from B146th Street to the easterly terminus

of the project at B19th Street. A contract is expected to be

awarded for this work in the spring of 1976. Total first costs

of the beach erosion control project are currently estimated to

be between 19 and 24 million dollars.

- 0. OC I"G'IEIRS U.IL. ARMY

Ii ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

aLA SR ~ . � U 0. U E E N S

�. -,J~ {
L 0 H G_ IL. L A I Oi

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I

B R 0 0 K L Y N BA SNBEACU

a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~# FAA AOCKAWAY

S/ID* A . A---- EYE
Irr~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~t

I-R~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~O RATR OPNA PRRVAR I 101
10 WO 1
L.�'� ONLOI~O LIr~

BEACH ROCKAAT A
eOL~~~~~~L

BROOKLY~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ROACT BARE * N AAC A.NWYR

.1 TLOSA STRCTRE OF A-PJ. -**A

AII~~~~~~~~~~~~~- OP El EVTINOF TAEPROOSE mumRI
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~WRSRI IN FEET . REACTSE ILEVL . C. ..
R~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~50 0 SCUR RARWA1

I~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ES ROCKAWA I NE T O RKAA INLETI

FLOO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.D WAL L a IC .
WOO
"~~~~~ raou~~~~~IICT

PROPOJ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~D LrVTL ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ LT 14.'

REACH 4
East Rockaway Inlet to Jones Inlet

-.35-

Reach 4

East Rockaway Inlet to Jones Inlet

I. General Description

This reach covers Long Beach Island and the mainland coastal

zone of Hempstead Bay to the north. Long Beach island is about

10 miles long and varies in width from 1,500 feet to 4,000 feet.

it is bounded on the west by East Rockaway Inlet, the north by

'Reynolds Channel, the south by the Atlantic Ocean and the east by

Jones Inlet. The terrain is low-lying and flat, with elevations

generally less than 10 feet above mean sea level. The depth of

water fringing the ocean shore and on the channel side is less

than 20 feet, with isolated spots in Reynolds Channel dropping

off to greater depths. The ocean shoreline consists of a contin-

uous beach strip. Except at the extreme western end and in the

Lido Beach area, a series of groins have been constructed along

the beach. The development on Long Beach Island is primarily

residential with extensive recreational facilities. Beach clubs,

apartment houses, and hotels predominate along the ocean shore.

The bay shore of Long Beach Island is predominantly occupied by

private homes and some publicly owned facilities. The Town of

Hempstead maintains park facilities on the ocean side of the

island at the eastern end.

The mainland portion of this reach is limited to the strip

of land within the tidal flood plain bordering the north shore of

Hempstead Bay from Far Rockaway on the west to the Hempstead Town

Line on the east. Residential development pressure has increased

greatly in this area in the-last 30 years. Much of this develop-

-36-

ment has been on reclaimed marshland along the bay shore. The

shores from East Rockaway to Seaford are commercially developed

with boat repair and storage yards, boat basins and fishing stations.

Island Park is the location of the Barrett Power Station ofthe Long

Island Lighting Company. Freeport is a well known center for

fishing and boating.

II. The Problem

The problem in this reach is a combination of shore erosion

from wave attack along the ocean coast of Long Beach Island and

tidal inundation from both the ocean and Hempstead Bay due to

severe storms and hurricanes causing considerable flood damages,

loss of life, and hardships to hundreds of families located in the

low lying areas.

A. Erosion

Beach erosion in this reach had been partially minimized

by artificial nourishment and groin construction. However,

an erosion problem has resulted from storms of unusually severe

intensity which have struck this area. These storms have

seriously reduced the width along many portions of the beach,

thereby exposing existing waterfront development to wave

attack and causing a loss of the beach area available for

recreational use.

B. Flooding

The tidal flooding affects both the ocean side of Long

Beach Is land and the coastal area of Hempstead Bay. Storm

* ~~~~~tides created by high winds and low barometric pressure

have overtopped the relatively low' beach causing backshore

flooding and inundating large developed areas.

-37-

The extensive damages experienced during the extra-tropical storms

of November 25, 1950, November 6-7, 1953, the hurricane of September 12,

1960 (Donna) and the extra-tropical storm of March 6-8, 1962 are indicative

of the severity of losses in this reach. During the storm of November 25,

1950, the area suffered the loss of one life due to flooding, approximately

one million dollars in known damages, and severe beach erosion along the

Atlantic Coast of Long Beach Island. The storm of November 6-7, 1953 caused

known damages of about one and a half million dollars in the area.

Hurricane Donna on September 12, 1960, produced the maximum tide of

record, 8.6 feet above mean sea level on the ocean side of Long Beach and up

to 7.3 feet in Hempstead Bay. Known damages were estimated at over four

million dollars. On Long Beach Island approximately two-thirds of the

total damage was sustained by private beach clubs, a major hotel, many stores,

and other commercial concerns. The remaining one-third of the damage was

residential. Many areas were inundated by three to four feet of water and

over 300 families had to be evacuated from their homes. In the communities

fringing the bay, almost all of the damage resulted from the flooding of older

dwellings and businesses which support the extensive small craft activity in

the area.

The storm of March 6-8, 1962 caused over $3.75 million in known damages

in this reach. The greatest damage to Long Beach Island consisted of

beach and dune erosion, dam age to structures related to marine activity was

also experienced during this storm.

-38

.11. Protection Alternatives

The Corps of Engineers, in response to expressed local

interest, examined the feasibility of providing beach erosion

control and hurricane protection for this reach. The Corps

examined both structural and non-structural alternatives to

arrive at a plan which responded to problems and needs of the

area. Alternative structural measures of protection, including

multi-purpose plans providing beach erosion control and hurricane

protection, including multi-purpose plans providing beach erosion

control and hurricane protection and a single purpose plan

providing only beach erosion control were formulated.

The multiple purpose beach erosion control and hurricane

protection plan featured: hurricane barriers at four locations,

reconstruction of twenty existing groins, construction of three

new groins, closure levees and periodic beach nourishment (see

Figure 7). The total first cost of this plan was estimated at

$45 million, based on October 1964 price levels, and had a benefit-

cost ratio of 1.1 to 1.0.

The structural plan was presented to the public at hearings

in 1965. Local interests voiced strong objection. Their major

concerns were with navigation safety at the East Rockaway Inlet

hurricane barrier, the dune height along Long Beach Island which

would inhibit the view of the ocean, adequacy of protection from

flooding from the east along M~eadowbrook Parkway into the protected

area and conservation of adjacent wetlands. Despite modifications

to the multiple purpose structural plan by the Corps and consider-

--39-

ation of a single purpose beach erosion control plan, the local

opposition continued. The Corps of Engineers, the State Department

of Environmental Conservation and Nassau County officials decided

in 1972 that there was insufficient support for a structural

project for this reach and work on planning was terminated.

Non-structural measures considered during the study included

zoning regulations, hurricane forecasts, hurricane preparedness

plans and flood insurance programs. Regulative zoning measures

would have limited effectiveness in reducing damages in this reach

because of the high degree of existing development.

The Corps, in its report on the project in 1973, suggested

local action in adopting struct zoning ordinances and building

codes to regulate construction and development of hurricane

preparedness and evacuation plans.

Ut. s(.~~ ~~~~A )j-.

*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CL I F al

i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=TD A.~ Ft � A --*0(

H 21404 EROSION ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CAC NSO ONTROL AND -URMCANK IT(Ju
(m ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ATLANTIC COAST OF LONG ISLAND, N.Y.
0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~JONES tNLET TO EAST ROCKA'*AY INLET
G'ENERAL MAP

e 0 0 ~~~~ ~~ .z......i ,.~~~0

APAN41 vl~~~~~ INI ts~~~ll WA aft"It~~~~~t sm~~~tv W."oftm .1....

cowPs OI 04MNEERS U. 9 Al""

TYPICAL BEACH FILL AND DUNE SECTION

A .~~~~~4i

1'. .1.d~,000 F. ~ W 3 *.0 oz.,w 'lsol 1"?

M*00050000 00T000~Z00 0l I A

RE.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~00 0004 0(

16 ~~~ '.4 ~~~~ ' - O~IFUNWAORRICA AR

I-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L_...s
OQ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"V

ICONSIDERED PLAN OF PROTECTION LEGN EAH ROIO CONOTROL AND HURRICANE STUDY
CD (NOT ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~RECOMMENDED)r ilMICAMI DANIRKIEII n ATLANTIC COAST OF LONG ISLAND. N.Y.

CONSIDERED PLAN OF PROTECTION

New OR "fewrosmoj~ WM".

7'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1. C IF-

00 00000- .i. PLATE 2

REACH 5
Jones Inlet to Fire Island Inlet

-40-

REACH 5

Jones Inlet to Fire Island Inlet

I. General Description

This section is about fifteen miles in length and consists

of the mainland coastal area and a barrier beach located about three

miles southerly of and running parallel to the mainland shore.

Hempstead, South Oyster and Great South Bays separate the barrier

beach from the mainland. The westerly eight miles of the reach

are located in Nassau County and the remainder is in Suffolk County.

The barrier beach varies in width from 1500 to 3500 feet and

is entirely publicly-owned and developed for recreational purposes.

Ocean Parkway, which runs for practically the entire length between

Jones Inlet and Fire Island Inlet, is at an elevation of about 14

feet above mean sea level. The westerly six miles is occupied by

Jones Beach State Park, developed by the Long Island State Park

Commission. Tobay Beach, owned by the Town of Oyster Bay, occupies

the remaining two miles in Nassau County. In Suffolk County,

Gilgo State Park is under the jurisdiction of the Long Island State

Park Commission and Gilgo Beach, Cedar Island Beach and Oak Beach

are owned by the Town of Babylon. Gilgo State Park is largely

undeveloped. Oak Beach is 'a'/residential development of privately

owned homes constructed on town-owned land.
' J.' .- ~-~'~ "~ . . ~ _. .. j ,.�

�"uch of the mainland along the bays is fringed by marshes

and a shallow water shelf having depths less than three feet below

mean low water. The topography of the mainland is generally gendiy

sloping and is intersected by drowned valleys of numerous streams

that drain into the bays. The shore is principally developed for

residential use with some commercial fishing and recreational usage.

-41-

::.The Problem

The problem consists of three parts: (1) the erosion of the

barrier beach, (2) tidal, flooding of the mainland coastal area as

a result of large storms and hurricanes, and (3) the need for an

adequate channel at Fire Is land Inlet.

A. Erosion

The barrier beach erosion problem is attributed to

the limited natural supply of beach material and to storm

damage. Except for the westerly three miles where there has

been accretion since the construction of the Jones Inlet jetty

in 1955, the remaining shore has experienced general erosion.

Shorefront areas developed for recreation have been damaged

by storms and although there is a great demand for additional

recreational facilities in the area, much of the frontage

has been left undeveloped because of the unstable condition

of the shore. The State and Federal Governments have placed

fill along the shoreline on many occasions over the years to

maintain the beaches and to protect Ocean Parkway and recre-

ational and residential structures.

Serious erosion also occurs at Oak Beach on the north

side of Fire Island Inlet. Prior to construction of a jetty,

the Oak Beach shore receded to the north as Democrat Point,

the westerly end of Fire Island, migrated to the west, with

maximum erosion occurring directly opposite the Point. The

jetty, constructed in 1940, arrested the westward migration

of the Point and checked the westward littoral drift from

entering the inlet for about ten years. Since then, the

littoral drift has bypassed the jetty and the result has been

-42-

considerable shoaling and shifting of the navigation channel

to the north. This caused swift tidal currents and the forma-

tion of a gorge channel along the Oak Beach shore. The erosion

caused by the tidal currents, along with erosion during storms,

has resulted in the destruction of several houses and the

relocation of others to avoid destruction.

B. Flooding

The Corps of Engineers has examined the tidal flooding

problem in this reach?. it finds that the problem of potential

flooding is not of great magnitude for the barrier beach between Jones

inlet and Fire Island Inlet, Simre adequate protection is

afforded by Ocean Parkway, which runs practically the entire

length of the beach. However, the mainland commu nities along

the inner bays have experienced considerable tidal flood damage

and loss of life during recent hurricanes and other great

storms. The low-lying areas are subject to inundation by

high stages in the bays resulting from flow through the inlets,

wind set-up and wave run-up.

C. Navigation

The problem of navigation in Fire Island Inlet arises

from the westerly movement of littoral drift into the inlet

which results in shoaling and shifting of the channel. This

causes a migration of the channel to the west with an alignment

broadside to the direction of approaching waves, treating

a hazard to navigation as well as the possibility of closure

of the inlet.

-43-

111. Protection Alternatives

The Corps of Engineers conducted a beach erosion control studyA

completed in 1955, of the barrier beach between Jones inlet and

Fire Island Inlet. The purpose of the study was to determine the

most practicable and economic method of providing adequate material

to maintain the barrier beach shore in a suitably stable condition

and providing an adequate navigation channel at Fire Island Inlet.

The plan developed by the Corps included: (1) excavation of

a 2,000,000 cubic yard littoral reservoir and bypassing of the exca-

vated material to a feeder beach and to Oak Beach. (When sand Is.

moved across the inlet to a feeder beach, it is then available, under

natural littoral processes, to nourish the beach to the west), (2) a

model study to determine the most effective and economic method of

inlet channel and shore stabilization, (3) construction of works

for channel and shore stabilization, and (4) subsequent sand bypassing

operations on three occasions. The plan was authorized by Congress

in 1958.

The first increment of work under this project was performed

in 1959. Two million cubic yards of sand were placed on a feeder

beach west of the inlet. Sand was also placed on Oak Beach and

a dike was constructed across the gorge channel along Oak Beach.

The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1962 authorized modification of

the project to include a sand bypassing system which was to be

developed by the Corps of Engineers.

The Corps conducted a review6 of the entire project. Revisions
were made to the project plan based on completed model studies

and review comments. The revised project consisted of: (1)

dredging a littoral reservoir at the inlet entrance, (2) a re-

-44-

handling basin for rehandling of dredged material inside the inlet

and a connecting channel between them, (3) constructing a revetted

sand dike and extending the jetty at Democrat Point, and (4)

nourishing the shore west of the inlet with 1,200,000 cubic yards

to a feeder beach on the average of once every two years. The

extension of the jetty and construction of the dike would be

deferred until the need was indicated by actual operating experience.

The sand bypassing system and rehandling basin are no longer

considered part of the project. Since 1973, two dredging contracts

have been completed in which sand has been removed from the channel

and littoral reservoir and deposited on the feeder beach. A third

contract has been awarded and work is expected to commence in the

spring of 1976. This contract calls for removal of 1,800,tIVUU

cubic yards of sand by February 1978, which may be sufficient to

complete the channel and littoral reservoir to required dimensions.

After completion of the project, sand deposited in the littoral

reservoir will be bypassed to the feeder beach on an average of

once every two years. Total project cost exclusive of the periodic dredg-

ing, is estimated to be -$19,000,000, with the State share being $7,699,000.

All benefits are to State-owned lands; thus, there is no local share.

The Corps of Engineers conducted a survey study7 of the tidal

flooding of the barrier beach between Jones Inlet and Fire Island

Inlet and the mainland coastal area along Great South, Moriches

and Shinnecock Bays. The Corps found that the problem of flooding

is not great for the barrier beach. However, the mainland commun-

ities bordering Great South Bay are subject to flooding during

high stages in the bay. The high stages are the result of flow

through the inlets, wind set-up, and overtopping and breaks in the

-45-

barrier beach east of Fire Island Inlet. There is an authorized

Federal project for beach erosion control and hurricane protection

of the Atlantic Coast of Long Island from Fire Island Inlet to

Montauk Point which provides for the raising of the dunes along

the barrier beach east of Fire Island Inlet. This project, when

built, will result in reducing flood stages in the bay and will

eliminate most of the mainland flood damages.

The study determined that construction of additional works to

protect the mainland coastal area against the residual tidal flood

damages after completion of the authorized beach erosion-hurricane

protection project along the ocean front is economically not

justified.

The timetable has not been established for construction of the

beach erosion control and hurricane protection project between

Fire Island Inlet and Montauk Point. The protection that would

be afforded by this project to the mainland areas of this reach

is an indeterminate time in the future. Emphasis must be placed

by the mainland communities on non-structural measures of flood

plain management.

07RP3 OF ENGINEERS

i\ , 4 0 2270 US~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ARM

* .w~~~~-.--o -.~~~~

V~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~_ _ _ _4

~~~~~~~~�'~~~~~~~~~~~~~m Lixf~
.5. -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 t

- �3.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~K~~~~~~~;~i MAP0

a~~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~ I VIINT M A P ,:s? 2

Ldge Nat~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~est Y' I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2

9~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2 .

32 .* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' .42~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2S
Ab, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5 .5 5,. ...
2' ~~~~~ 'A 4 ~~~~~~~ ~~T- ~ ~ ~ ~ 35 42 42 ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ 94 4* . . I. 4b1 42 74~~~~~~~~~2 4 5 6 e
* - .~~~~~~~~~~~ -~~~~~~ 20 21 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 31 ~~~~~~~~~4 45 40 f 45~~~~~~~~~~s1 1 os~
* I q - 39 >24 33 N 40 .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ '2 * Io* 4 65 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~444,.. i 44t
23 ~~~ 2? 2? ~~~. ~~ S 0~~~~...-..--7r~~~~.-424 ~ ~ ~ 41 41 42 44~~~~~- .222-3" *.2.. 5 72 49 0
0445 12? ,~~~~~~~ ~~ 22 3;~~~~~~W2 32 41 :3 62 .42 5i.*.i4;.sA.04;..:: ~~~~~~~~~~2 4 9454 I '.*g I711
24 tO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3 40 42 92 04 So 545 g*

24 21 25 22 STUDY AREA 61 - 22 72 42 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3 4 7 etSI21
87~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 37 i s 4025 41 oo0 .. 2 6? s o 55 S,~ 4 . :

4035~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~i 4? 40 4 4
42~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3 42 42 744 0 3 lo
23 2 25 22 441 N8 42 SS 44a ao 73� 74
42~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3 St 4 42 7
ad~~~~~~~4 46i uo i t 26 6?
Is 95 A 2 II 7
"S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~9 34 32A0 40 23 o
52 60 35 St 21 4 0 63 44 62StSSV
A.~~~~~~~~0 42 46 24 26
94~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~6

5.cx As 0 40 55 6 *5 64 22eso
31~~~~4 52 72 558 - - ------
42~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~6 Ss v cL I8 55 4 7 7
40 46 42 43 Ss 53 so 'd~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4 *
42 40 1 SIN2.A40 53 St6 64 .14
Al 42 V_ 40 40 5; 0 l1oo6
__________________~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 53 So St Jso 4 i
54,' . . ~ ~ ~~. . 23 72 20 20 72 ~~~~~~~ BEACIS 0210443 S goN~O.COIAIISO
92~~~~~~~~~0 45 N4 of eos or 6515 711 SI4 is1 0 A

ST~~~~~4 a s 61 .42 S t 24 5% I S . 132
53 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~7 as4 --
02~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o Ty 42,
WO~l~lIS 7446 LISCO 4~ 144? III4,C 19 es60 75 Si to*7 '4 11.4.4, is. 4.11
03~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~It~W 455 LasE

REACH 6

Fire Island Inlet to Moriches Inlet

-46-

REACH 6

Fire Island Inlet to M~oriches Inlet

I. General Description

This reach consists of the portion of the south shore

of Long island and the Fire Island barrier beach between Fire

island Inlet on the west and Moriches Inlet on the east. The

reach is 30 miles long in a general east to west direction and

lies within the Towns of Islip and Brookhaven, Suffolk County.

included in the reach are the Villages of Brightwaters, Patchogue,

Bellport, Saltaire and ocean Beach.

The Long Island mainland shore and the Fire Island

barrier beach are separated by Great South Bay and Moriches Bay.

Both are shallow bodies of water with depths of four to ten feet

and with a number of large shallow flats. Bay widths range up

to five miles. Several channels have been dredged within the

Bays for both commercial and recreational boating. The Bays are

important commercial shellfish and finfishing areas and the

extensive marshes, mudflats and tidal shallows are important

waterfowl habitats.

The coastal area of the mainland along the Bays is

fringed by marshlands and a shallow water shelf. The topography

of the land is gently sloping with an irregular shoreline.

The barrier beach is generally less than 2,500 feet

wide, with irregular sand dunes up to about 30 feet. The ocean

faces of the dunes are characterized by steep slopes carved by

the wind, while the inshore faces slope back gradually and are

usually covered with beach grass or other vegetation. In some

-47-

localities the dune ridges have been partially removed or leveled,

* ~~~~and residences have been constructed along the dune lines.

Robert Moses State Park is located at the western end

of Fire island. Twenty summer residential communities, including

the Villages of Saltaire and Ocean Beach, occupy the two miles of

barrier beach east of the State Park. Suffolk County has developed

a park in the vicinity of Smith Point. All of Fire Island between

the easterly end of Robert Moses State Park and Moriches Inlet is

within the boundaries of the Fire Island National Seashore. The

National Park Service of the Department of the Interior is charged

with its management. The Park Service is presently revising its

master plan for the preservation and development of the Seashore.

(see Chapter I, Fire Island National Seashore).

II. The Problem

The primary problem in the reach is the erosion of the

barrier beach. Additional problems are the flooding of the coastal

areas along the bays and the maintenance of a navigation channel

through Moriches Inlet.

A. Erosion

The erosion of the barrier beach is severe in this

reach. Losses occur from both the natural westward littoral

drift, which carries beach material westerly along the shore,

and from large storms. Studies conducted between 1940 and

1956 indicate that the Fire Island Inlet to Moriches Inlet

area lost an average of 270,000 cubic yards of beach annually.

This resulted in an average recession of six feet in beach

width per year. Lossof beach area not only diminishes the

area's recreational value, but increases the danger of a

breach in the barrier beach during a large storm.

-48-

B. Flooding

Developed areas of the barrier beach are quite

vulnerable to damages from flooding during large storms.

The mainland areas bordering the bays are also affected by

high tidal levels.

During the hurricane of September 1938, the maximum

of record, ocean levels rose to about 10 feet above sea level

excluding wave run-up. The ocean overtopped the dunes on the

barrier beach at several locations, exposing the mainland to

direct wave attack and causing severe damages. Generally

the dunes with a crest height of IS feet or more withstood

attacks of the sea and protected leeward areas. Those areas

in which the dune crest height was less than 16 to 18 feet

were generally damaged by wave overwash or breached.

C. Navigation

Navigation problems of Fire Island Inlet are

discussed under Reach 5. Moriches Inlet, which connects the

Atlantic Ocean with Moriches Bay, was opened as a result of

tides and waves of abnormal height in March, 1931. It migrated

westward about 3,500 feet during the period 1931 to 1947. in

1947, an attempt at its stabilization was made by local interests

by construction of a stone revetment on the west side. However,

storm conditions resulted in closure of the inlet in 1951.

During 1952-53 local interests constructed stone jetties on

both sides of the inlet and performed dredging on the bayward

side. it was while this work was going on that the inlet

reopened as a result of a storm in September, 1953. The inlet

is continually subject to filling and shoaling and periodic

dredging is necessary to maintain navigation.

-49-

III. Protection Alternatives

over the years, New York State and local interests have

made numerous attempts to restore and stabilize damaged beaches.

These efforts have taken the form of beach fill, dune construction

and construction of groins. Results have been variable, but

generally they have provided only temporary relief.

The Corps of Engineers conducted a Cooperative Beach

Erosion Control and Interim Hurricane Study8 in 1958 of the
Atlantic Coast of Long is land from Fire Is land Inlet to Montauk

Point. The purpose of the study was to determine the most practic-

able and economic method of restoring and stabilizing the beaches

and to develop an adequate plan of protection against hurricane

tidal flooding.

The recommended plan includes widening the beach along

developed areas from Kismet through the east end of the reach to

a minimum width of 100 feet at an elevation of 14 feet above mean

sea level and raising of dunes along the entire reach to an

elevation of 20 feet above mean sea level. Also included is a

provision to construct up to 50 groins along the entire project

length from Fire Island Inlet to Montauk Point. Construction of

the groins would be contingent upon demonstration of actual need,

based on experience. The plan also calls for periodic beach

nourishment if needed.

Congress authorized the project in 1960 and the Corps

of Engineers commenced detailed planning for the area east of

Moriches Inlet.

Detailed design of the project for the Fire Island Inlet

to Moriches Inlet reach has been delayed by several factors,

-50-

including the establishment of the Fire Island National Seashore.

Another problem delaying progress has been the determining

of a fair apportionment of the local share of the project cost.

In 1962, the area suffered $6.6 million in damages as

a result of a severe northeast storm combined with flood tides.

Following the declaration of a natural disaster area, the Corps

of Engineers constructed a "tan year" temporary berm to pro-.

vide protection against all but major hurricanes. Maintenance

was to have been provided by local interests.

A series of storms in 1965-1967 severely damaged this

berm. At the same time, owing to an unusual combination

of natural forces, the normal summer replenishment of the beach

and berm did not take place. Because of the severe erosion,

the developed areas in the western part of the reach were ex-

tremely vulnerable to damage from future storms. During 1967,

the State constructed two emergency beach fill projects--

at Davis Park and Point 0'Wood-Ocean Beach. These projects

were small, intended to strengthen the beach and dunes until

more permanent repairs could be affected. Another, large

-project consisting of a beach and dune fill of 309,000 cubic

yards was constructed by the State at Davis Park in the fall

of 1967. The project was designed to provide protection for

the interim preceding construction of the Federally authorized

project.

-51I-

Recently, a State law was passed allowing the formation

of special taxing districts to participate in the cost of hurri-

cane and beach erosion control projects. The Suffolk County govern-

ment has been reluctant to burden its entire constituency with the

cost of a project that benefits only some of them. A Suffolk

County hurricane protection, flood and shoreline erosion control

district is currently in the formation process. The district

would include the area bounded by the easterly boundary of Robert

Moses State Park on the west and the westerly boundary of the Fire

island National Seashore property at Watch Hill on the east,

essentially all of the communities on Fire Island. Formation of

the district would presumably facilitate county participation in

the construction of the authorized project.

The formation of the Fire Island National Seashore has

raised some questions in connection with the authorized federal projects.

Since the Seashore includes considerable tracts of land within

the proposed project boundaries, it must be determined how their

plans for managing and developing the property relate to the

project plans. The NatLonal Park Service has recently completed

revising their master plan for Fire Island and this should provide

some of the answers. A correlative to this is the question of

how the Park Service would finance its share of project costs.

At the present time, there is considerable local feeling

against construction of any groins within the reach. Those against

groin construction contend that beach and dune construction by

sand fill is more desirable. However, without groins, the erosion

rate of the beaches and dunes may prove to be undesirably high.

The Corps of Engineers completed a report on Moriches

and Shinnecock inlets in 1959. It was found that the existing

works at Moriches Inlet, constructed by local interests, are not

adequate to maintain a navigable channel through the inlet and

that without improvements, the inlet could eventually close.

Recommendations in the report call for a channel 10 feet

deep and 200 feet wide from that depth in the Atlantic Ocean

through the inlet, thence a channel six feet deep and 100 feet

wide to connect with the 'Long Island Intracoastal Waterway,

rehabilitation of the existing jetties and revetments, seaward

extension of the east and west jetties and cotistruction of a sand-

bypassing facility. Project costs were estimated at $3,331,000,

1957 price levels. Congress authorized the project in 1960, but

no work has been accomplished to date.

LINDENHURST BABYLON/ B YSHORESLPSAN/PTCOE

ST~~~~~~~~~~ATCHGE

- ~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~PAR .

ND I/ T H ' . . a,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~8~P7 MASTIC

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l - A'TC Cif wA

REACH 7

Moriches Inlet to Shinnecock Inlet

-53-

REACH 7

Moriches Inlet to Shinnecock Inlet

I. General Description

This section is a little over fifteen miles long in a

generally east to west direction and consists of the mainland

coastal area fronted by a barrier beach. Portions of Moriches

and Shinnecock Bays separate the mainland and barrier beach along

the western and eastern thirds of the reach, respectively. In

the Westhampton Beach-Quogue area the mainland is separated from

the barrier beach by the Quantuck and Quogue Canals, parts of the

Long Island Intercoastal Waterway. The reach lies within the

Towns of Brookhaven and Southhampton, Suffolk County. The Incor-

porated Villages of Westhampton Beach and Quogue are located in

the middle of the reach.

The barrier beach is quite narrow, generally less than

2,500 feet wide, with dunes up to 30 feet in height. In some

localities the dunes have been removed and residences constructed.

A road runs nearly the entire length of the barrier beach and

there are four bridge connections to the mainland. There is

extensive residential development from near Moriches Inlet to the

easterly boundary of the Village of Quogue.

Moriches and Shinnecock Bays are shallow bodies of

water, averaging four to five feet in depth. Both support large

finfish and shellfish populations. The mainland shoreline bordering

the bays is quite irregular, being indented in several places by

drowned valleys. The Shinnecock Canal connects Shinnecock and

Peconic Bays.

Shinnecock Inlet connecting the Atlantic ocean with

Shinnecock Bay, formed as a result of the hurricane of September

1938, is 1,500 feet long and 800 feet wide. Tidal flow passing

through the inlet is estimated to average 300 million cubic feet

per tide.

II. The Problem

The primary problem is the vulnerability of the barrier

beach to direct ocean wave attack. This has resulted in reduction

in the width of protective beaches and destruction of dunes

fronting the shore. During severe storms the ocean has broken

through the barrier beach into the bays and inundated developed

areas on the barrier beach and on the mainland, causing loss of

life and severe property damage. Additional problems are the

flooding of mainland areas and maintenance of navigation in

Shinnecock Inlet. Moriches Inlet is discussed in Reach 6.

A. Erosion

The barrier beach erosion problem is attributed to two

sources, lack of a natural supply of beach material and storm

damage. A comparison of shorelines during the 1940 to 1956

period showed that the average recession between Moriches and

Shinnecock Inlets was around ten feet per year.

B. Flooding

This reach has been severely damaged during large storms

and hurricanes. During the hurricane of September 1938,

maximum of record, practically the entire barrier beach was

inundated. Ocean levels rose to about ten feet above sea

0 ~~~~~level excluding wave run-up. In the Westhampton Beach area,

-55-

several large, opulent summer residences were either severely

damaged or destroyed. Over the entire Fire Island Inlet to

Montauk Point reach, damages were estimated to be over $6,000,000

(1938 prices). Of this amount, almost 80 percent occurred

along the barrier beach from Fire Island Inlet to Southampton.

Forty-five persons lost their lives or were reported as missing

and over 1,000 houses were destroyed or damaged.

C. Navigation

Shinnecock Inlet was formed by wave action and extremely

high tides during the September 1938 hurricane. The inlet is

1,500 feet long and 800 feet wide with a controlling navigable

depth of about seven feet at mean low water. The inlet is used

by both commercial and recreational boating. The principal

problem is that there is a continual shifting of the channel

in the inlet and the formation of bars at both ends. This

inhibits the use of the channel under normal conditions and

makes access to the harbor extremely hazardous or impossible

under stormy conditions. Tidal exchange of bay waters is

needed at each inlet to reduce pollution and to improve salinity

and temperature.

III. Protection Alternatives

Extensive repair work was necessary on the dunes following

the 1938 hurricane. Suffolk County, with the aid of WPA funds,

carried out extensive dune rehabilitation work. Snow fencing,

brush and heavy wire barriers were erected over extensive areas

of the barrier beach to trap sand and to hasten the natural dune

0 ~~~building process. A bulkhead was constructed on the west side of

Shinnecock Inlet to stabilize the newly formed inlet.

-56-

in 1945, a State law was passed permitting State involve-

ment in erosion control projects on Long Island to the extent of

50 percent of the cost of planning and construction. In succeeding

years, several beach and dune restoration projects were completed

and additional jetty construction was undertaken at Shinnecock

Inlet.

in 1958, the Corps of Engineers completed a Cooperative

Beach Erosion Control and Interim Hurricane Study 8of the Atlantic

Coast of Long Island from Fire Island Inlet to Montauk Point. For

this reach, the recommended plan consisted of widening of the

barrier beach to a minimum width of 100 feet at an elevation of

14 feet above mean sea level and raising dunes to an elevation of

20 feet above mean seal level, grass planting on the dunes and

construction of up to 23 groins, if needed. Project costs for

the reach were estimated at $13,627,000 in 1958. The project

was authorized by Congress in 1960.

The first construction under the project was accomplished

in 1966 with the placement of eleven groins at Westhampton Beach

(see Figure ). Four more groins were added to the immediate

west of the original eleven in 1970. Subsequent to construction

of the groins, intensified erosion occurred downdrift, westerly,

of the groin field.

in 1973, the Suffolk County Legislature passed a resolu-

tion over the veto of the County Executive authorizing construction

of six additional groins at Westhampton. These six groins would

have extended from the existing groin field westerly to the vicinity

of Moriches Inlet and would have protected the highly developed

area now suffering serious erosion. Subsequent to this, Suffolk

-57-

County was asked to sign a contract of local cooperation, a requirement

for State participation under the Beach Erosion Control Law. The Suffolk

County Legislature did not authorize the project.

Two basic problem exist. Are groins the answer to the erosion

problem at Westhampton Beach? The existing groin field was constructed

in the middle of the reach and it was expected that more would be con-

structed westerly to Moriches Inlet shortly thereafter. Also, the

decision was made at the time of construction of the first eleven groins,

not to fill the area between them with sand. The result has been the

interception of the littoral drift of sand by the eastern end of the

groin field to the detriment of the beach west of the groin field.

There is substantial disagreement within the local community

about the effectiveness and desirability of the groin concept of treat-

ing beach erosion. This has made it difficult to get support from local

units of government of any project involving the construction of groins.

Subsequent to the County's most recent Rejection of the groin

project, the County Legislature passed a resolution supporting a project

to consist of sandfill without groins and sand by-passing systems at

Moriches and Shinnecock inlets. This would involve a massive amount of

sandfill. The closest source of sand in Moriches Bay and Moriches Inlet.

However, some local groups oppose taking sandfill from these locations

because they fear that it would upset the ecological balance of the bay.

The only other likely source of the vast quantity of sand needed

for the project is the open ocean. However, the technical feasibility

of mining sand in the open ocean, miles from shore, has not been suffi-

ciently established~to date. Additionally, there must be reasonable

conviction that the sandfill once placed will be reasonably stable. The

Corps of Engineers estimated that it will take two years to complete feasi-

bility and technical studies on this proposal. Project costs could be in

-58-

the vicinity of $25,000,000.

The Corps of Engineers completed a report on Moriches and

Shinnecock Inlets in 1959? Existing works at Shinnecock Inlet, con-

structed by local interests, were found to be inadequate to maintain

a navigable channel through the inlet and it was found that without

improvements, the inlet would eventually close.

Recommendations in the report called for provision of

a channel 10 feet deep and 200 feet wide from the depth in the

Atlantic Ocean through the inlet, thence a channel 6 feet deep

and 100 feet wide to connect with the Long Island Intracoastal

Waterway, rehabilitation of the existing jetties and construction

of a sandy by-passing facility. Project costs were estimated at

$3,527,000, 1957 price levels. Congress authorized the project

in 1960, but no work has been accomplished to date.

RlVERIIEAD

B A T"I

'BA SOUTHAM~~~~~~~~~~~~~~APTO
?~~~~~~~~~~,-tu ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ HINCC P*P. D AY6AUA
SAAST~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~TAN EC A~IOA BEC

OQ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~OO
ii~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a Y--- OTAPO
(D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~6

I-.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.H E C Apo EC

REACH 8

Shinnecock Inlet to Beach Hampton

-59-

REACH 8

Shinnecock inlet to Beach Hampton

L. General Description

This reach covers about 22 miles of the south shore of

Long is land. From Shinnecock Inlet to Southampton, a distance of

about three and one-half miles, it consists of a barrier beach

separated from the mainland by Shinnecock Bay. The beach is

generally less than 2,500 feet wide, with irregular sand dunes

up to 30 feet in height. There is a road along the reach behind

the dune line but development is sparse.

From Southampton to Beach Hampton the Long Island main-

land directly fronts the ocean, unprotected by a barrier beach.

The shoreline here consists of a rather narrow beach. Dune forma-

tions are not as extensive as along the barrier beach further West.

In the area between Southampton and East Hampton there are a number of

landlocked bodies of water just shoreward of the ocean front.

The largest of these are Agawam Lake, Mecox Bay, Sagaponack Lake,

Georgica Pond and Hook Pond. There is a considerable amount of

residential development along ocean shoreline at the Village of

East Hampton and at Beach Hampton.

11. The Problem

The problems in this reach of Long Island's south shore

are the same as in other reaches; that is, a combination of erosion

of the shoreline and flooding from severe storms.

A. Erosion

Erosion of the shoreline in this reach has been

moderate over the years. The Corps of Engineers estimated

that the average annual shoreline recession between 1940 and

-60-

1956 was 2.1 feet per year. The few groins and bulkheads

constructed by private interests have been ineffective in

providing erosion protection during large storms.

B. Flooding

Flooding is a serious problem in this reach as it

has been along all of Long Island's south shore. The hurricanes

and northeasters which sweep up the Atlantic Coast of the United

States push high tides and large waves directly on the exposed

shores of this reach and all along the coast.

The September 1938 hurricane was the most devastating

storm in this area. Tides ranged up to 10 feet above sea level

and wave run-up on the shore reached even greater heights. The

flat shoreline of the mainland along the northside of Shinnecock

Bay received extensive flooding from high bay levels. Damages

from this storm were well over $6,000,000 (1938 prices) in

the area between Fire island Inlet and M~ontauk Point.

III. Protection Alternatives

As previously noted, local attempts to stop erosion of

the shoreline have not been effective. The Corps of Engineers

conducted a Cooperative Beach Erosion Control and Interim Hurricane

Survey Study8 in 1958 for the Atlantic Coast of Long Island from

Fire Island Inlet to Montauk Point. The purpose of the plan was

to determine the most practicable and economical method of

restoring and preserving the beaches and to develop an adequate

plan of protection against hurricane tidal flooding.

The study disclosed that the most practicable plan of

improvement to serve the dual purpose of beach erosion control

and hurricane protection for the area between Shinnecock Inlet and

-61-

Beach Hampton involved widening the beach along developed areas

as far east as Mecox Bay to a minimum width of 100 feet at 14 feet

above sea level and raising dunes to an elevation of 20 feet above

sea level the entire length of the reach. This would be supple-

mented by grass planting on the dunes, interior drainage structures

at Mecox Bay, Sagaporack Lake, and Georgica Pond. Also included

in the plan, which covered the entire south shore from Fire Island

Inlet to Montauk Point, was the possible construction of 50 groins,

if needed, and the placement of approximately 34,000,000 cubic

yards of sand. The beach would receive periodic nourishment,

with Federal participation in sharing the cost for the first 10

years.

Progress in 'constructing beach erosion and hurricane

protection in this reach has been slow. Because of the eroded

condition of the shore between Georgica and Hook Ponds, New York

State, with Suffolk County participating in the cost, constructed

two groins and placed 450,000 cubic yards of sand in 1959 at a

cost of $615,700.

Two more groins were constructed as part of the Corps'

project on the ocean shore immediately east of Georgica Pond.

The groins were constructed in 1965 at a cost of $721,000. No

further construction of the Corps' project proposals has taken

place since this time.

The part of the proposed Corps of Engineers' project

covering Georgica Pond has become a controversial issue. The Pond

presently is somewhat saline; niot freshwater but not as salty as

the ocean. It is cut off from the ocean by a low narrow dune. Approxi-

mately twice a year from the Town of East Hampton Trustees, owners of the

-62-

Pond bed, order a channel dug across the dune, lowering the Pond

level. This custom,1 called- "letting out" the Pond, is at least

three centuries old. Some property owners dislike it because the

Pond sometimes floods cellars when it is fullest, before it is let

out, and, is ugly, smelly and not good for boating for a while

afterwards. Some landowners and the East Hampton Village Boardhave

wanted this Pond level stabilized. Other landowners and the East-

Hampton Town Trustees would prefer to continue the present operation

The Village Board believes that Georgica Pond should be perma-

mentl~y sealed off against the sea and thus become a freshwater re-

servoir. This could potentially aid in meeting projected municipal

water supply needs. Water supply could be withdrawn directly from

the Pond. However, storage capability is limited due to the

possibility of increasing the flood hazard at the upper range.

A two foot drawdown would reduce Pond depth to two or three feet

over most of its area. The Departmrent of Environmental Conser-

vation estimates the yield for a two foot drawdown would not

exceed 1.8 million gallons per day. An additional restraint

against using the Pond water for municipal water supply is that

the water receives pollution from the surrounding residential

development. Complete treatment of the water would be necessary

bef ore use.

Changing the Pond to a freshwater body would probably

affect the groundwater by displacing the fresh-saltwater interface

seaward. This would allow greater groundwater withdrawal for

water supply.

The effects of instal ling an interior drainage structure

at Georgica Pond are still quite conjectural. The Corps of Engi-

neers is presently preparing an environmental impact statement for

-63-

the entire Fire Island Inlet to Montauk Point Project, including

Georgica Pond. It is expected to be completed sometime in 1976.

No further construction will begin on the project until then.

RIVERHEAD .4Ro,,,v6.

till,
6 REA Jr

PFCONIC
B A r

ISLAND

SHINNECOCA,
CANAL eight

AMAGANSETT
HAM
AA
SAOAPDAW H
LAKE
I UOGLIE SOUTHAMPTON CK
NNECOCK A Y &ACAWAM

TIANA PEACH AMP ON fifiAc
Rea cb

A 7' A N

REACH 9
Beach Hampton to Montauk Point

-64-

REACH 9

Beach Hampton to Montauk Point

J. General Description

This most easterly reach of the south shae of Long

island is slightly more than 14 miles long. The land form is

quite narrow and could be characterized as a peninsula, jutting

out in an easterly direction from the Long island mainland, into

the Atlantic Ocean.

The beach along the Atlantic Ocean is generally narrow

in this section. Dune formations are not as extensive as those

along the barrier beaches to the west, although a well-defined

dune area exists in the vicinity of Napeague Harbor. In the

easterly ten miles of this section, there is a series of bluffed

headlands rising over 50 feet above the ocean level.

Shore development along this reach is not as extensive

as in the reaches to the west. With the narrow beach, much of

residential development is up out of the flood plain. Recreation is

the principal land use of the coastal area. Hither Hills State

Park is located on the easterly side of Napeague Harbor (see

Figure -__

II. The Problem

The problems in this reach, as in the reaches to the

west, continue to be erosion and flooding, with the emphasis more

on flooding.

A. Erosion

Shoreline erosion is less of a problem, generally,

in this reach than in reaches to the west. The Corps of

Engineers estimates that the average annual shoreline recession

in the 1940 to 1956 period was 1.0 feet per year, excluding

-65-

erosion of the cliffs near Montauk Point. A seawall has been con-

structed to protect the U.S. Government property at Montauk Point.

B. Flooding

This reach is subject to tidal flooding from both

the Atlantic Ocean and Block Island Sound. Little has been

documented on damages during past storms. However, newspaper

reports note that parts of the reach have been isolated when

Montauk Highway and the Long Island Railroad have been flooded.

Ill. Protection Alternatives

The Corps of Engineers, in their Survey Study8 covering

this area, recommended that the beach dunes be raised to an eleva-

tion of 20 feet above mean sea level as far east as Hither Hills

State Park and at Montauk and opposite Lake Montauk Harbor by the

placement of sand fill. Included in the project is a provision

for periodic beach nourishment for the life of the project, about

50 years subsequent to construction. The Federal Government would

participate in the cost of nourishment for the first 10 years.

This project was authorized in 1960, but no construction has been

accomplished.

I~~~BLC SLAA~ OND

8AY ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~POND.

MPTON~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ MONTAU)(

8~~~~~~~~~~IO6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ HPAU EHA~p O(RA

(v T I C 0 C E ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A N

1ii

-00-

References

I. "Cooperative Beach Erosion Control and Interim Hurricane Study

(Survey), Staten Island, New York, Fort Wadsworth to Arthur Kill,'

U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, March 1964.

2. 1teport on Beach Erosion Control and Interim Hurricane Study of the

Atlantic Coast of Long island, New York, Jones Inlet to East

Rockaway Inle1e', U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, January 1973.

3. "C~ooperative Beach Erosion Control and Interim Hurricane Study

(Survey) Atlantic Coast of New York City from Rockaway Inlet to

Norton Point, New York (Coney island Area)" U. S. Army Corps of

Engineers, August 1973, Revised December 1974.

4. "Tidal Flood Plain Information, South Shore of Nassau County, Long

Island, New York", prepared by Corps of Engineers for County of

Nassau County Planning Commission, June 1971.

5. "Beach Erosion Control Report on Cooperative Study (Survey), Atlantic

Coast of Long Island, New York, Fire Island Inlet and Shore Westerly

to Jones Inlet", U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, September 1955.

6. "Review Report on Beach Erosion Control Cooperative Study of Atlantic

Coast of Long Island, New York, Fire Island Inlet and the Shore

Westerly to Jones Inlet", U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, March 1965.

7. "Interim Hurricane Study of the Atlantic Coast of Long island, New

York, Jones Inlet to Montauk Point (Remaining Areas), U. S. Army

Corps of Engineers, November 1967.

-67-

8. "Cooperative Beach Erosion Control and Interim Hurricane Study

(Survey), Atlantic Coast of Long Island, N.Y., Fire Island Inlet

to Montauk Point", U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, July 1958.

9. "Survey Report on Moriches and Shinnecock Inlets, Long Island,

New York", U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1959.

10. East Hampton Star Newspaper story "Georgica Pond 'Stabilization'

Becomes an Issue Once Again", February 6, 1975.

11. "Cooperative Beach Erosion Control and Interim Hurricane Study

(Survey), Atlantic Coast of New York City from East Rockaway Inlet

to Rockaway Inlet and Jamaica Bay, New York", U. S. Army Corps of

Engineers, April 1964.

12. 'Fire Island National Seashore Master Plan Draft", March 1975,

U. S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service.

13. Gateway National Recreation Area, Basic Information, September 1975,

U. S. Department of the Interior.

-68-

APPENDIX

BABYLON / BYSHR

- L~~~~t4QENHURST I' ~~~~~~~~~ SUP - / ~~~~PATCHOGUE

q~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~H

GILGO SIATI PARK~~~ DA~ ~~ 4 T 4 ~ -~~ - &IAS1~C
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ fiLPx

LGO~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~PR 57 IE BEAC .4

.4~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~qr '4 I&O( +

RIVE RHEAD

RECONIC

Q~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ A' T

A T ~~~L A N T

A r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o

~~~ ~~~~~ 42~~~~~~~~I 151 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CS
AN~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i

AMAGAIWSET"
AGAW40 ~ SG~~l, I Es

~~~~~ ~~~Rea ck

4~~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ E A N

- N -P .~/~, u*o~r

iG L1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~TLL ~~~~~~~~~~~~ISLAND
~ ~~h1~~~~~7~
8LOCKC ISLAND SOUND

CARTWRIGiT

8RID GE~AMPTO- AJMAAGANSETT MO N T A U K
5GOAPOINTrr i._I
5.46AR ~ aS rrCrr POIN
SAGAPUNACKrr~ IMProN NoAVLA*
rtr~~~~~~~~~~~~~~NI �GCEb Recich 9

T I C E A N

Ouitline for Second Phase

I. Literature Search

A. State

B. Federal

C. Local

D. Other

II. Coordination with Local Interests

A. Land Use Planners

B. Private Interests

III. Coordination with Federal Interests

IV. Preparation of Alternative Plans

V. Coordination and Participation

A. Local Government

B. Federal Government

C. General Public

VI. Preparation of Preliminary Reach Plans

A. Methods

B. Costs

C. Responsibility of Local, State and Federal Governments

D. Changes Needed in Existing Policies, Regulations, or Legislation

II. Legislation

A. P.1L. 88-587 - .. ..

Public Law 88-587
d~~h -88th Congress, S. 1365
September I11, 1964

To teetahiIh thle Fire Island National Sta hore. and for other purposes.

Unit'd 'St'llee of Aniertira in Con gre-sr- a-vmemnbled, That (a) for thle Ftire I aland
purpose of conserving and preserving for thle use of f uture generation.s National Sea-
certain relatively unspoiled aud iild(Ivelopedl beeaches, dunes, and share.I
ofther natural feiatures within Sutrolk County, Newr York, whichl PO. Eabihent
sess high values to the Nation as examples of unspoiled areas of great
natural beauty in close proximity to large, concentrations of urban
population, the Secretary of thle Interior is authorized to establish
an area, to he known as thle "Five Island National Seashore".
(b) Thie boundaries, of the nai-inal se-ashore shall ext end~ froml tile Boulldaries.
easterly bminulary of Robert ossState P1ark eastward to Moriches
Inelet und shall include not only Mmir sland proper, hut nlso sueh-
Moriches Ba4y adjacent. to Fire J-4hinld as Sexton Island , WXest. Iland,
Hlollins Island, Ridge Island, ]Pielica Island, PuItt ersquash Island. and
R wevesIslandnd such other small] and -adjacent. islands, marshlands,
A and wet. lands is wou~~ldend themselves Io contignity and reasonable
adilinistrationl within file, national Seashore and, ill additionl, tile
waters surroundling said area, to distances, of one thousand feet in the
Atlantic Ocenn and upl to four thoutsanld feet in Great South Bay and
MoN(rielies B~ay, all1 as (lehlnatdl Oil a ma-p identified as "Fire Islatid
National Seashore No. OGl1-00O2', dated June 1964. Thle Secrtanry
shall flilesaid map) withi the Federail Register, and it may also be exall-
ined inl the offices of the Department. of thle ITwerior. _____
So.2. (a) i retjiry is allthorizP ed tarquireln(UIS. the Acquisition or
intent of Cogres that:li shiavl j ---r ,pJ:rijerd fmnds~becjnme land.
nvilaw e~o t! ij;o.a~uharsitioncnh ccnpli-hc r78 S;AT. 928.
1~~~lonat iono ot vzd~at~. ins ~yr Ler~�ca~er - 78 STAT * 929.
and 6yinyjterest thoreiilj'yi bina -thbonaile- ftes hr as
estah~l ished un duject menr ___ _ r intelrest

any~~~~~~~~ NIIdnr n oterI~~L~
1ii~ifi~~fiiw, Fdera proertylocated -with ii such area many,
with te concrrenceof the agny 11having custody' thereof. be tralls-
ferred without. consideratOion to the administrative jurisdiction of
the Secretary for use. by him in carrying out the provisions of this
Act. Ill exliveisin,-bis authoritytn...Luqu~i~e~pjiropPt~n~or~u
of i bi. i S11sptol- ile ratiy
coititrcts requiring h; xiidti', whlen appropriated, of1_1iid.-
au~~hori~l~vi hii~Xct~h yof tl'IT11&611it ifs ifi-iu ______
s*a ~Ij slnt aesh]l be r-.Qnting~enit onl thle appropriatIon of funds smnf-
-(I) !vn~i lie Sevrotary dr'termninmes thai'iiMinds and waters or intier- Publication in
ests t heireil hjavej benJeqie y 1.11(. ITnit rd Sl~ates iln sulhi'ienit Federal Reeister.
111111it iy to) prilillt.,al :i'drcministra i'vi. lnitt, lie %ii:1ll dvclare the estal)-
lishinvit fir II he FirP lslai id Nat ionial Sewishore by publication ofI
-4 ~~~~~~~notive inl thv l'edera Rrgrisf-er.
(C) The. Si-wretary shall pay not niore than the fair. market. Value,
as det'erniini'd by learn, for any hind or interest therein acquiired by
purchase.
(d) lWhen acquiring land by exchange the Sceretary may accept
title to any nonfedera Ily owned land located within the bounidaries
of the juational seashore and convey to the rat any federally

A-5

Pub. Law 88-587 -2 - September 11. 1964
ovw-ied land tinder the jurisdiction of the Secretary. The lands so
exclutiged'V shall ho approxiniately ei-inai iln fair Market Vitalte, buit I lia
Secretary mnay accept cash fromt or pilly cash to thle grantor inl order
to equialize the v'ulies of thle lands exchianged.
(e With tione. exceptIion the Seeretary shiall not acqiiireanp;i
vately owned iniproved property or interests therein within the~ I "tud-
aries, of thle -seristore or -ltty property or interests therein with111ti'lte
communtnities dlelineated oil tile botandary miap mentioixed inl s-ect ioll 1,
except licicli or waters a111(1 adjoinling hinld withbin Stich CoitiIIIInit ies
whielh thle Secretary deteririines .1re neefed for puiblic liccess to tile
beatch, wvithout the consent of the owners so ]oing as the appropriate
local zonling agenicy shall huive inl force and applic~able to such Iproperty
a (hully aulopted, Valid, zonling ordinlance that is Satisfactory to tlie
* ~~~~~~~~~~~Secretary. The sole except ion to this limnitation onl the poiwer of filie
Secretary to condenutl i!itproved property where appropriate zoning
ordinanices exist shall be in ieapoiitlyegtilera froni file
earsterly botnduiary of the( Brookh aven town park at. Davis- Park, ill
tile town (if Brookhaven, to the westerly bounvdary of thle Sniith lPoint
('otinty Bark. Ini this areat only, when thep Secretary dem it advka-i
ble for carryingolut tile Ipurposcs of this Act. or to inprove the contigui-
* ~~~~~~~~~~~~ity of thle park lantd and false its adtinilistrat ionl, the secretarv naly
raise inl which tflip, se:Cretary exervises this righIt of conidemnat1ionl o;f
iniprotved property thle lbeieficial owner oi- owners (not bring a corpo. .
* ~~~~~~~~~~~rationl) of rny liiiprovedl property so condemined, provided lie, slit-, or
they held thur samie or a greater estate in thle. ptropeeh nJl 1 ~t
maliy elect ars a, con1dition If suhcqiition by tile Secretary ally oneC
76 S1'i. 92q. of tile following" thre-e alternlatives:I
78 STAT.'930. * () tit-t the Secretary shiall take thle said p~roperty inl fie
stiiiple absolute, and pay the fair miark-et. valuec thereof ais of the
drites of such toaking;
(2) tChat. thre owner or owners shall retaiir at life estate inl said
property, itreasurvid onl the life of thle sole owner or onl lthe life
of alny one personl amlong' mulitiple owners (riot ice of tilie prersiol
so designated to be file in writing with thie Secretary withini
six itiondtiinarter thle- talking) or onl the. life of the sio-vi vor il Itit le t
(if any estate held oil .Jnlly I, IM"), as at teniancy Ill tile e.1tirt ty.
Thle price inl sucht cask shall be dinfinishied by tile act niarial fair
miarket value of lie life estate retained, deter-nirned onl thle basis
of standlard actularial me1thods; I
(3) tathoweoronrshllretain anl estate for twenty-
five yecars,. The price in this case shall likewise be (liiiniilised
bly tile valuie of tile estate retainied.
"Improved (f) T1'Ie terni "iniprovei prop~erly ias us-ed inl this Act shall mpean
property.11 vn building, thle const riteion of wvhich was beguin before .1 uly 1,
194:1, and suaclr atknoitint of ]land, not inl excess of tw'vo acres inl the case
(of a1 residnce1C or tell acres in flth- case of at commnercial or industrial
uise, oil which t he building is sit nated as flip Secretary counsiers rea-
sonatbly riecessa ry to thle ulse of tle, building: IProrided, That tilie
Secretary miay exclude fronm un proved properties anly beach or waters,
to-et lice wit i so niiucl of t he landic ad joining suchlk beach or waters
as lie deemhs lecessiary for publiL. ace~ss theretoi.
Regulations. Sri%. 3. (a) lit order to carry out. the proi'isions of section 2. tire
Secretary shaill issule regulations, withichli may lie ninreuded front t itne
to lii rm, spetifc y iug" stt a loIsIIiat. (re cosist en t. wit h tIle ptinrposes
of tIi is All. f ':st. zliihg on liii rulers w hriclii tiust ini,4tet his itipp~ron al.I
of (I) lprobit lit in- new 4-onkinrerial or iiulustrnial inses, o1 her t arn
C0iiuneivirihl or iiiithstriaatrises .which the Secretary considers tire conl-

A-6

Septem~ber 11, 1964 -3 -Pub. Law 88-587

sistent. with the purposers of this Act, of il1 propertly wvithin file
national setwhore, ant! (:.) pro)iotiiig thle protect to, ;d(levelflpmleit
for purp-loses of this Act, of thle land within tits national seashore by
meaiis of acreage, frontage, and setback requliremfents.
* ~~~~~~~~(0) Following issilance of ,luch regrililitionls tile Secretary shall ap-
prove anyv zoninglf ordinauce or any amdincdett to any ji~proved zoning.
ordinance sub~niitted to him fhot conformis to filhe stand(ards contained
-ill the regulations in) effect at the time of adoption of thle ordinance
or 1111elI(liment. Suchi approval slioll remain eilective for so long as
surh ordinnane or aniendmnent remains inl effect as applroved.
(d) No zoning ordinanee or nmendmvent thereof shiall h0e approved
by thle Secretary which (1) contains anly provisions that lie coniders
adver-se tO the protection and developmenit, in accordance wAith thle pur-
poses of this Act, of the area, conuirising tihe national seashore; or (2)
fails to have the effect (if providing that. thle Secretary shall receive
- ~~~notice of any variance granted under, or any exception made to, the
.11pliCation of suchk Ordinance or amendment.
(e) I reanly imiproved property, with respect to which the Secretary's
authioriiy to acquire by. coiidemnation has been suspended ,according
to the provisions of thisl, Act, is made thle subject of a vreiance under,
or becoliuies for all reasonl an exception to, such zoning ordinance, or is
subject to any varianve, exception, or use that fail% to conform to any
ispplicable standard contained in regulations of the Secretary issued
1.1117s111.11t to this Section and in effect it file time of passage of such
j o~~~~~~~rdill.111e, thle suispensioi of thle Secretary's authority to acquire such
i:'pr z:2oZ propry nudemnation shall .automatically cease. 78 STA'. 030.
(f) The Secretary shal furnish to any party tin interest upon request 78 STA .-. 31.
.1 eertilivale inwith espectgto hich the Sce
tity au11thority to acquir bycnlntoni upned.
svA'. 41. (a) Owners Of iroeprpryaqrdbyteSctryOwners' use
rely reserve. foi- themiselve Sn hir ucsoso sin i of oCprperty.
ucse and occuipancy of the0 improved property for noncomeiars-
dentiil purposes 'for a t erms that is not. more thaivia twenty-live years.
T1he vahue of the resermel righit shall be deducted fromn the fair mnarket.
value paid for the propwrty.
(b) A right of utse and occupancy reserved pursuant. to this section
salml bco Subl)ect to termination b~y the Secretary upon his determina-
tiont thatr the use and occupancy is not consistent wvidh an applicable
zoningl~ ordinance approved by the Secretary in accordance wvith the
provisions of section :3 of thils Act, and tipon tender to the owner
of the right onl amiount equlal to the fair inarket value of that portion
of the right wthichl remains unexpired onl the (late of termination.
Sa. 5). The Secretary shall permit huanting, fishing, and shell- Huntin.g and
fishing Oil lands and wvaters under his administrative jurisdiction fishing.
* ~~~~~~~within Ithe F ire Niland 'National] Seashore in accordance wvith the lawvs
of New York and the United States of America, except. that the
Secetar11y may designla e 7011cS where, land establish periods when,
!Io hm'11tingr shall 1'e perinitted for reasons of 1)ublic safety, admin-
istrat ion, or public uts and enjoyment. Any reguilations of the
Secretnry unader this s;edt ion shall be is!,ied aftr consultation with
the Conservation Depar meati of the State of 'Newv York.
Sar. A. Thle Secretary may accept and use for purposes of this Act,
nyrieru or personal ) -operty or monelys theat. iiiay be donated for

Sac 7.(a) Thel( Sec vntay shall adnuinister anmd proteilt the [ire !;until Forest
Island N'atiolal Swash, me wvithl file -.i1uuui r til~fcnsrigte P rr 5moe.
nature. resources local 'd there. Tile, !rea. known as the Sunken
Forest P'reserve ,hah b, preserved from 6ay to (.mean in as nearly its
present. state as possibi ] without. developing rouds therein, but. con-

A-7

, Pub. Law 88-587 - 4 - September 11, 1964
tinuing the pre.ent access by t.lhose trails already existing and
limitilng new acce.ss to similar trails limited in number to those
necessary to allow visitors to explore and appreciate this section of
the seashore.
(b) Access to that section of the seashore lying bet-ween the easterly
boundary of the Brookhaven town park at I)Davs Park and the west--
erly boundary of the Smith Point County Park shall be provided by
ferries and footpaths only, and no roads sllall be constructed in this
sect-ion except such minimiin roads as may be necessary for park ma in-
tenance vehicles. No development or plan for tile convenience of
} visitors shall be undertaken therein which would be incompatible -with
.-1 thfe preservation of the flora and faulia or tile physiograplic condi-
! tions now prevailing, and every effort shall be exerted to maintain
and preserve this section of the seashore as well as that set forth in
the preceding paragraph in as nearly their present state and condition
as possible.
(c) In administering, protecting, and developing thle entire Fire
Island National Seashore, the Secretary shall be gulidled by tlhe provi-
* - sions of tilfs Adt and tile applicable provisions of tile laws relatin to
the national park system, and the Secretary may utilize any other
statntory authority available to him for the conservation and develop-
Inent of natural resources to tile extent he finds that such authority
will fmrther the purposes of this Act. Appropriate user fees may le
coilected notwithistanding any limitation on such authority by'any
provision of law.
Shore erosion C.. 8. (a) Thle authority of the (Chief of Engineers, Department
cotrol. of tile Army, to undertake or contribute to shore erosion control or
78 STAT. 931l beach protection measures on lands within tile Fire Island National
78 STAT. 932 Seashore shall be exercised in acolrxilnce withl a plan that is mutually
acceptable to the Secretary of the Interior and tile Secretary of tlhe
Army and that is consislent with tile purploses of this Act.
(b) The Secretary shall also conmnltte the necessary land which
; rmay lbe required at. any future dtte for tile construction of one new
inlet across Fire Island in sllch location as may be feasille in accord-
ance with plans for such an inlet vwhichl are mutually acceptable to the
Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of the Army and that is
consistent withl the purposes of this Act.
Fire Island Na- SEC. 9. (a) There is hereby established a Fire Tsland 'National
tional Advisaor Seashore Advisory Commission (hereinafter referred to as tilhe Com-
Cnaission. mission). The Commission shall terminate on tlhe tenth anniversary
Eatablishnment. of tile date of this Act or on the declaration, pursilant to section 2(b)
' . of this Act, of the establishiment of the Fire Island National Seashore,
whichever occurs first. The Commission srill consist of fifteen mem-
hers, each appointed for a term of two years by the Secretary, as
follows:
:i (1) Tenl members to be appointed from receommendations made
by each of the town )oardls of Suffolk ('ounty, New York, one mem-
ler from the recommendations made by each such board;
(2) Two additimnal mcmhers to lie appointed from recomnmenda-
i lils of tile town )oal-ds of the towns of Islip and Brookhaven,
4 -S ttirlk (' lmnly, New York;'
(:1) ()One nnilm 1I'r to bI v : pIl)oipinhl rroill 1.he. recoininen'l:tion of tile
Gor ;rcnor of tile Slate ofr New .York;
' (4) OnIe nmellubr io ,- llppointrd fromn tile recommendation of
the coluty executive of S"iGt(hlk Colnty. New York;
(5) One member to le designated by the Secretary.
(b) The Secretary shall designate one member to be Chairman.
(c) A member of the Commission shall serve without compensation.

A;-8

_*_ .- . _ . ......... .. . - . . _-. .- -.- -- _ -. __

September 11, 1964 -5 -Pub. Law 88-587
bd) The 'oinmissiou established bry this section shall act and advise
byaffinnlatiYe Vote Of a inn 1joLity Of thle mnembers thereof.
(e) Thle Seeretary or his designee shall, from- time to timie, consult
wvith the nieniliers of the Commnission wvith respect to matters relating
to thle deveropniment of Fire Island National Seashore -.and shall consult
with the -membhers with respect. to carrying out the provisions of
setions 2., l, and 4 of this Act.
(f) (1) Any inember of the Advisory Commission -appointed under Conflict of
this Act Shall ho exemipted, witlh respect to such appOintment., from interest.
tile operation of sections 281, 283, 284, and 1914 of title IS of the
United States Code and section 190 of the Revised Statutes (5 U.S.C.
99) except. as otherwise specihied in p~aragraphi (2) of this subsection. 76 Stat. 13125.
j ~~~~~~(2) The exemption granted by paragraph (1) of this subsection
Shall not extend-
* (i to the receipt. of payment of salary in connection with the
appointee's Government service from any sources other than the
* ~~~~~private employer of the appointee at thle time of his appointment;
or
(ii) durling the period of such appointment, and the further
prod of twro years after the termination thereof, to the proseu-
tioon or participation in the proscu~tion, by any prson so
appointed, of aniy claim ag.Anst thle Government involvinan
matter concerning whichi the appointee had any responsibility '78 STAT. 932.
arising out of his appointment (luring the period of such7e TA.n3
appointment.
SEx. 10. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated not more Appropriat ion.
than $16,000,000 for the acquisition of lands an interests in land pur-
suant to this Act.
Approved September 11, 1964.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
IVUXSE REPORT No. 1638 accompanyIng H. R. 7107 (Comm. on Interior
-j ~~~~~~~~~~& Insular Affairs).
SENATE REPORT No. 1300 (Conn. oni interior & Insular Affairs).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 110 (1964):
Aug. 6: Considered and passed Senate.
Aug. 20: Considered and pazzed House, amended, in lieu of
H. R. 7107.
*1 ~ ~~~~~~~Aug. 21: Senate concurred in House aendenients.

Qpo 33.13 ISO

B. P.L. 89-244

I. old public Law 89-244
89th Congress, H. R. 8035
October 9, 196-5

79 STAT.
To anthorize the Secretary of the Interior to accept a donation of property in
thecouty f Sff~k tatrL of New York, known ab thre William Floyd E.tate,
for addition to the Fire 1Islnd -XatizoaL beabhore, and for other purposes.

4 ~~~~~~Be it enarted by the Seva-te and Route of Representative8 of the
J ~~~~~~~UniiedYtates of Am'erica in Co-ngress? as-vemfbled. That the SeretryFeIsa
of the Interior is authorized to accept the donation of approximately .;tj oral se-3
Six hundred and eleven acres of lands, submerzed lands. islauds, and 's~
mnarhlands or interests therein, known its the William Floyd Est~ate,
.4 ~~~~~~located in the town of B~rookhaven, county of Suffolk, and4 State of
New York, delineated oii a certain xmap entitiled "Map of the Fire
Island 'National Seashzore, Including the William Floyd Estate",
numbered OGP-0003, dated May 1i6t5. which mapl or a, true copy
thereof shiall be filed with the Fed1eral Register and may be examined 7 1i rzat'
in the offices of the Department of the Interior. Such donation.may ie.deral Rei_
-1 ~ ~~~~~~~he accepted -subject to such ternis, covenants, and conditions as the1 5ste0r.-
Secretary finds will be in thre public interest.
SEC 2. The Secretary is also a uthorized to accept the donation of thq
main dwelling, on said lands, which was the birthplace and residence
of General William Floyd (a ,-igrner of the Declaration of Independ-
ence) and the furnishizigs therein and any outbuildings, subject to
lie terms. covenants, and conditions. The'Secrerary is authorized to Lease if~r.s
] ~~~~~~lease said lands. dwellings, and outbuildings to the'grantors thereof e1nsei
for a. term of not more than twenty-five fears, at $i per annum, and
during the period of the leasehold the secretary may provide pro-
tective custody for -such property.
SEC. 3. Upon expiration or surrender of the aforesaid lease the
property shall become a detached unit of the Fire Island National
Seashore, and shall be admninistered, protected, and developed air
accordance with the laws applicable thereto subject, with respect to
said main dwelling and the furnishings therein. to such terms, cove-
nants, and conditions which the Secre-tarv shall have accepted and
approved upon the donation thereof as in Die public interest.

Approved October 9, 1965, 6:30 a.mr.
J

LEGISLATIVE IlISTORY,
HOU1SE REPORT No. 990 (Comi. on Interior A Insular Affairs)
SENATE REPORT No. 763 (Coav.. on Interior &Insular Affairs).
* ~~~~~~~~CONGRESSIONAL RECORD; Vol. III (1g6'5)1
Sept. 20: Passed House.
-~~~~~~~ ~~Sept. 23: Considered and passed Senate.

GPO so~~~~~inM

III. Regulations

A. Fire Island National Seashore Zoning Standards

PART 28-FIRE ISLANID NATIONAL maPoint County Park, where the Secretary
SEASHORE; ZONING STANDARDS may acquire land or improvements by
this means if he deems it advisable for
Sec. carsying out the terms of the Act of Sep-
28.1 Iftroduction. tember 11, 1964, or to improve the con-
282 General provisions. tigulty of park land and ease its admin-
283 Seelhoredalshre district. ation. Improved property owners
28s Varlancesand ecptions. within such 8-mile area have certain
elections under section 3(e) of that act
Anvs=our: Tbe proviaeons or this Part i. if their property is taken for these pur-
Issued under Sec. 8, 78 8tat. 930, and Sec. 3, poses. The Secretary may acquire, by
9 Stat. 35. condemnation or other means, any beach
SoCiz: The provisions of this Part 28 or waters and such ldjoinlng land as he
appear at SI P.R. 5280, April 2, 196, unless determines is necessary for access to the
otherwise noted. beach or waters.
6 28.1 Introduction. (d) As used herein, "improved prop-
erty" means any building, the construc-
(a) In administering, protecting, and tlion of which was begun prior to July 1,
developing the Fire Island National Sea- 1963, together with such amount of land
shore (hereinafter also referred to as the on which said building is situated as the
Seashore), the Secretary of the Interior Secretary considers reasonably necessary
(hereinafter referred to as the Secre- to the use of said building not, however,
tary), is required to be guided by the to exceed 2 acres in the case of a rest-
provisions of the Act of September 11, dence or 10 acres in the case of a com-
1964 (78 Stat. 928), and the applicable mercial or industrial use. The Secretary
provisions of the laws relating to the may exclude from such "improved prop-
National Park System. 'The Secretary, erty" any beach or waters, as well as land
further, may utilize any other statutory adjoining such beach or waters, which he
authority available to him for the con- deems necessary for public access thereto.
servation and de lopme ' of natural (e) The regulations in this part are
resources to the extent he finds that designed to establish minimal standards

poses of the said Act of September 11, Fire Island National Seashore must con-
1964. form if certain improved properties and
(b) To the extent consistent with the properties within the delineated com-
aforesaid Act of September 11, 1964, de- munitics are to be exempt from acquisi-
velopment and management of the Fire tion by condemnation. These standards
Island National Seashore will be con- are intended: (1)'To prohibit new com-
ducted in a mannits er to assure the con- mercial or industrial uses of all property
servation of its natural resources and the within the Seashore, other than uses
within the Seashore, other than uses
widest possible public use, understand- which the Secretary considers are con-
ing, and enjoymnint of its natural and sistent with the purposes of the act es-
scientific features. This contemplates tablishing the Seashore; and (2) to pro-
a broad range of outdoor recreational mote the protection and development of
activities, including, but not limited to, the land within the Seashore in keeping
hiking, boating, swimming, fishing, pic- with the purposes of that act by means
nicking, nature study, water skiing, or of acreage, frontage and setback require-
beachcombing, but any such activities ments
shall be compatible with wise resource (f) Following promulgation of the
management and the physical capablli- regulations in this part in final form,
ties of the Seashore.
(C) Wties ofn, the Seashore. the Secretary is required to approve any
(c) With one exception, the Secretary zoning ordinances or amendments to ap-
may not acquire by condemnation any proved zoning ordinances submitted to
privately owned "improved property" proved zoning ordinances submitted to
him which conform to the standards
(defined in paragraph (d) of this sec- herein set forth. He may not, however
tion), or interests therein within the approve any ordinance or amendment
boundaries of the Seashore, or any prop- thereto which: (1) Contains any provi-
erty or interests therein within the corn- sions that he considers adverse to the
munitles delineated on the boundary map protection and development of the area
of the Seashore, for so long as the appro- comprising the Seashore, or (2) fails to
prlate local zoning agency shall have in . provide that the Secretary shall receive
force and applicable to such property a,
duly adopted, valid zoning ordinance that
is satisfactory to the Secretary. The or any exception made to, tne application
sole exception to this limitation on the of such ordinance or ?.mendrient.
power of the Secretary to condemn im- (g) Nothing contained in the reg-.da-
proved property shall be in the approxi- tions in this part or in the zoning ord-.
mately 8-mile area from the easterly nances or amendments adopted pursuan,
boundary of the Brookhaven town park to such regulations for the area w.thln v
sto D~lsPrk t Brookthaven the Seashore shall preclude the Secre-
tary from exercising his power of con-
to the westerly boundary of the Smith demnatlon with respect to: (1) Any

�F~~~~eoatio with respec o 1 n

property not within the definition of "im- clubs shall be permitted within this dis-
proved property;" (2) property within trict unless there is compliance .ith the
the 8-mile area between Davis Park and acreage, frontage, and setback require-
the westerly boundary of the Smith Point ments, the height limitations and maxi-
County Park; or (3) any other prop- mum plot occupancy requirements
erty-including "impoved property" and contained in a zoning ordinance, or
property within the delineated commu- amendment thereto, which is acceptable
nities-if the appropriate local zoning to the Secretary. If through natural
agency does not have in force and appli- phenomena or causes a .lot or lots are
cable to such property, zoning ordinances so diminished in size that an owner of
that are satisfactory to the Secretary, or property within this district would be
if a property owner fails to comply with unable to comply with the requirements
the conditions, requirements, and restric- prescribed in this paragraph, for moves,
tions contained in the regulations in this alterations, or improvements, such owner
part and in zoning ordinances approved or the zoning authorities of the towns of
by the Secretary. Nor shall these regu- Brookhaven or Islip may, as provided in
lations preclude the Secretary from I 28.5. request the Secretary of the In-
otherwise fulfilling the responsibilities terior to determine whether the proposed
vested in him by the act authorizing move of an existing structure to a loca-
establishment of the Seashore or by the tfon on the same or another lot would
Act of August 25, 1916 (39 Stat. 535), as subject the property to acquisition by
amended and supplemented. condemnation.
28. .2ended and supplement. (d) Those provisions relating to acre-
� 28.2 Ccneral provisions. age, frontage and setback requirements.
Following issuance of the regulations height limitations, and maximium plot
in this part, the towns and villages wholly occupancy requirements contained in
or partially within the Seashore bound- zoning ordinances of the towns of Brook-
aries shall submit to the Secretary for haven and Islip which are in effect in
his approval, all zoning ordinances and the Seashore District on the date of is-
amendments thereto which are in force suance of the regulations in this part
and applicable to property within the are hereby adopted as the acreage, front-
Seashore and which demonstrate con- age, setback, height, and maximum plot
formity with the standards in the regula- occupancy standards for such district.
tions in this part. The submissions shall From time to time these standards will
include any ordinances and amendments be reviewed and, if necessary, revised
in effect prior to the issuance of these through the issuance of amended reg-
regulations which demonstrate such con- ulations. It is the clear intention of
formity and any that have been adopted the act authorizing establishment of this
to implement the regulations in this Seashore that all land within its bound-
par ries-except certain "improved prop-
erty- and property within delineated
� 28.3 Seashore districL cOmmunities-be acquired by the United
(a) Definition: This district shall States as rapidly as appropriated funds
comprise all those portions of the Sea- - are made available therefor and before
shore within the towns of Brookhaven future development occurs. Accordingly,
and Islip which lie outside the commu- unimproved property situated within the
nities delineated on the official map of Seashore District will be subLect to ac-
the Fire Island National Seashore, num- quisition by the Secretary by condemna-
bered OGP-0002, and dated June 1964. tlon in the event it is developed by the
(b) Zoning ordinances in effect or owner for any purpose.
adopted for this district shall conform (e) There shall be in effect in this
to the general and specific standards pre- district appropriate limitations, require-
scribed in the regulations in this part ments, or restrictions upon the burning
for such distrIct and shall be consistent of cover, the filling or clearing of land.
with the objectives and purposes of the the cutting of trees or re moval of bra ,
of September 11,64 (78 Stat. 928), undergrowth, and shrubbery, the re-
,o that-to the extent possible under moval of sand and the dumring, storing,
Ne-J York State law-natural resources or piling of refuse, materials, equipment,
and values will be preserved and pro- or other unsightly objects which would
tected and any uses within such district detract from the natural scene.
will be compatible with preservation of (f) Signs within this district shall
the flora and fauna and the physio- not be illuminated and shall be limited
graphic conditionls now prevailing. In to one square foot in area, including
keeping with these objectives and pur- signs advertising the sale or rental of
poses. additional or increased commer- property which may be placed only on
cal or industrial uses are prohibited the property advertised for sale or
within the Seashore District. rental No other advertising displays or
(c) No moving, alteration, or improve- signs shall be permitted. Nanconform-
ment of existing residential dwellings or ing signs may continue such noncon-
structures appurtenant thereto or Ieach forniity until they are destroyed, struc-
structures appurtenant thereto or turally altered, reconstructed, changed,

- ~ "27� *' r-. ~�7~

or moved, but the period of such non- (e) Signs within this district shall not
conformity may not exceed 2 years from be illuminated and shall be limited in
the date the zoning ordinance imposing size to 1 square foot in area, including
the restrictions contained in this para- signs utilized for advertising the sale or
gr:.- h Is ap!proved by the town, rental of property which may be placed
only on the property advertised for sale
� 28.4 Developed areas distric or rental. This size limitation shall not
(a) Definition: This district shall in- apply to existing commercial or indus-
clude all these portions of the Seashore trial uses for which the signs may not
within the towns of Brookhaven and exceed 4 square feeet in area and may
LTlip and the villages of Ocean Beach be placed only on ire property on which
and Saltaire, which are identified as the commercial or industrial use occurs.
: communities on a map of the Fire Island Advertising displays or commercial signs
National Seashore, numbered OGP-0002, for new or expanded commercial or in-
and dated June 1964. dustrial uses which are acceptable to
(b) Zoning ordinances in effect or the Secretary may hot exceed 4 square
adopted for this district shall conform feet In area and may be placed on only
to the general and specific standards the property on which such commercial
prescribed in the r, a: itons in this part or industrial use occurs. Nonconform-
and shall be consistent .;ith the objec- ing signs may continue such noncon-
tives and purposes of the Act of Sep- formity until they are destroyed, struc-
tember 11, 1964 (78 Stat. 928), so that- turally altered, reconstructed, changed,
to the extent possible under New York or moved, but the period of such non-
-4 State law-the natural resources and conformity may not exceed 2 years from
cultural values of the Seashore will be the date the zoning ordinance imposing
preserved and protected, and any de- the restrictiors contained in this para-
velopments or uses within such district graphtlsapproved bythe.town oriyillan
* i will be in accord with the purposes of
* ~the Seasn~ore.~ � 28.5 Variances and exceptions
the Seashore.
(c) Those provisions relating to acre- (a) Zoning ordinances or amend.
age, frontage and setback requirements, ments thereto, for the districts compris.
height limitations, and maximum plot ing the Fire Island National Seashore
occupancy requirements contained in . may provide for the granting of varl-
zoning ordinances of the towns of Brook- ances and exceptions.
haven and Islip and of the villages of (b) Zoning ordinances for each of the
Ocean Beach and Saltaire, which are in districts established by the regulations
.ffect it. the Developed Areas District on in this part shall contain provisions
the,date of issuance of these regulations which constitute notice to applicants for
are hereby adopted as the acreage, front- variances and exceptions that, under
age, setback, height, and maximum plot section 3(e) of the Act of September 11,
-: occupancy standards for such district. 1964, the authority of the Secretary of
From time to time these standards will be the Interior to acquire "improved prop-
reviewed and, it necessary, revised erty" by condemnation would be rein-
.1 through the issuance of amended reg- stated if such property is made the sub-
ulations. Within the scope of the stand- ject of a variance, exception, or use
ards herein prescribed or as hereafter which, in his opinion, fails to conform
amended, existing undeveloped proper- to the standards contained in the regula-
ties within this district may be utilized tions in this part or to the zoning ordl-
for the construction of detached, single- nances subsequently approved by the
family dwellings and any such existing Secretary. Zoning authorities or owners
dwellings may be altered, moved, or en- of "improved property" may consult the
larged. Ex.cept through adoption of an Secretary as to whether any proposed
:; amendmentothe town or village zoning variance or exception would terminate
�* ,,ordinance that is satisfactory to the Sec- the suspension of his authority to acquire
retary, propertywithin this district may the affected property by condemnation.
not be utilized for: (1) The establishment The Secretary, within 60 days of the
or expansion of commercial or industrial
uses; or (2) the establishment for uch determina-
ansion of apartment facilities or any tion, or as soon there,:fter as is reason-
otsher multiple-unit daellings. In re- ably possible, will advise the owner or
viewing amendments proposing the es- zoning authorities whether or not the
4 1 tablishment of these uses the Secretary intended use will subject the property
shall take into account the consistency to acquisition by condemnation.
of the proposed use with the purposes of (c) Pursuant to section 3(d) of the
the Fire Island establishment act. Act of September 11, 1064, every zoning
(d) There shall be in effect in this ordinance or amendment thereof, for the
district appropriate limitations, require- districts comprising the Fire Island Na-
ments, or restrictions upon the burning tional Seashore shall have the effect of
of cover and trash, the removal of sanrd
eands the dumping, storing, or saindg f providing that the Secretary of the In-
refuse, materials, equipment, or otheror be given notice o any variace
unsightly objects which would detract granted under, or any exception made w.
from the cultural and natural scene. the application of such ordinance or
amendment.

`7' " '"~" ~ ��~CV- -r~r� ?*ri~~. ~�~7~P~i~�1�

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233

Peter A.A. Berl
Commiss ioner

January 18, 1977

Mr. Peter L. Wise, Chairman,
Standing Committee on Great
Lakes Coastal Zone Management
300 North State Street, Room 1010
Chicago, Illinois 60610

Dear Mr. Wise:.

The Preliminary Report on Great Lakes Open-Coast Flood Levels prepared
by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and circulated on December 15 to members of the
Standing Committee on Great Lakes Coastal Zone Management has been reviewed by
staff in the Office of Program Development and Planning of this Department. The
response to the preliminary report is favorable. There is no criticism of metho-
dology applied and the results appear reasonable and useful. The information is far
more complete and refined than the previous submission. Inclusion of the additional
return periods (10, 50 and 500 year) with the already accepted 100-year data provides
sufficient information needed for a standard F.I.A. Flood Insurance Study.

Two subsequent actions are needed as follow-up to this work:

1. FIA should adopt the results of the Open-Coast Flood level
analysis and provide the frequency reach elevations for all study
contracts for Great Lakes communities. This will result in lowering
costs of individual state and local studies by eliminating additional
analysis and will provide consistency of results for contiguous
communities studied by different contractors.

2. FIA should request the Corps to complete the analysis by deter-
mining generalized wave runup values for the Great Lakes shoreline.
While precise wave runup calculations are site specific, the limited
degree of precision needed for FIA insurance applications makes
such a generalized determination acceptable. Three variables in
this context are significant in determination of wave runup: fetch
and exposure to prevailing winds, offshore slope and depth, and
beach slope. All three of these variables lend themselves to
averaging over long reach lengths allowing the development of runup
reaches for half-foot or one foot increments. Rather than have

-2-

runup determined on an individual basis for each community, the Corps
should complete the analysis. The 100 and 500-year flood inundation
lines could then be determined by study contractors for individual
communities with elevation data provided by FIA.

A second letter of January 15, to Standing Committee members, referring to
Phase II of the FIA Flood Level Study for Great Lakes also was reviewed by Depart-
ment staff. in reviewing the items to be included in the Phase II report several
comments were suggested.

The second recommended action listed above on our Phase I comments is also
pertinent to our comments on Phase Ii. The Corps refers to wave runup by citing
their Shore Protection Manual and stating they do not plan to study wave runup under
Phase TI. The argument inferred is that this is too complex a task to approach on
a reach basis. We reiterate the point we've made in item 2 above; runup information
could readily be developed for reaches at least by foot or half-foot increments.

Similarly, the same argument holds for the Corps' desire to determine pre-,,
cisely the flood water levels in embayments and other areas of natural protection
associated with the open coast levels determined under Phase I. Such refinement inf
most cases is not warranted for FIA's purposes. For example, the maximum difference
between the 10-year and 100-year events for Lake Ontario reaches is 0.7 feet, while
the same difference for Lake Erie does not exceed 1.5 feet. FIA's concern is the
nearest whole foot water surface elevation for insurance and regulatory purposes;
therby further refinement of data is purposeless.

The difference between open coast and embayment conditions is most apparent
when dealing with wave runup. Bays and other sheltered areas receive little wave
runup due to a lack of fetch. Half-foot or whole-foot increment reaches for wave
runup could be established for most areas which would be adequate for the purpose of
the flood insurance progranm.

Thank you for the chance to comment on the preliminary report and the pro-
posed Phase IT. Acceptance of the report by FAI will mean that everyone will be
working with the same data.

Sincerely,

Fred Howell
DEC/CZM Study Manager
Land Resources Planning Group
Office of Program Development
and Planning

cc: District Engineer,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Detroit District

REPORT OUTLINE

Task 7.2
Flood Plain Management
and
Erosion Control

Summary

I. Flooding and Erosion Processes

The sources of New York State's coastal zone flooding problems vary
greatly from tidal to riverine to lake. The different characteristics of
these varying sources are described. The causes of erosion are often
complex and difficult to understand, particularly beach erosion. A
straightforward description of beach processes is presented, avoiding
complicated technological explanations. This chapter will enable the
reader to better understand the problems and solutions discussed in later
chapters.

II. Overview of Flooding and Erosion Problems in New York State's Coastal
Zone

This section presents available information on flooding and erosion
problems in the coastal zone. For Task 7.2, New York State's coastal zone
has been divided into seven reaches, six of which are discussed in this
report. Lake Erie, Niagara River, Lake Ontario west of Cayuga County,
Hudson River estuary (including the East River), Long Island Sound
(including the shore of Westchester County) and Atlantic Ocean. The
remainder of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River coastal zone will
be discussed in a report being prepared by the St. Lawrence-Eastern
Ontario Commission.

The narrative discusses land use patterns along the reaches, such as
agricultural, residential, industrial or recreation. Soil characteristics,
whicih are directly related to the erodibility of the shore, are noted.
Information on existing shore protection and its effectiveness is also
included.

III. Availablid Data Sources and Data Gaps

This chapter is a brief discussion of sources of information on
flooding and erosion, and more importantly, identification of gaps in
available information and data. Suggestions will also be made of ways
to fill these gaps.

IV. Management Alternatives

This section reviews the alternatives available for managing the
coastal zone. It is divided into two parts, structural and non-structural.
Structural solutions to flooding and erosion problems have been used

extensively in New York's coastal zone, particularly in the Atlantic Ocean
Reach. Their effectiveness in correcting problems has varied. In some
instances, they had had a negative imp;act on the adjacent coastal area.
Some of the available structural measures - and their positive and negative
aspects - are discussed.

Non-structural measures cover a wide range of alternatives. They are
the most desirable management method in a large part of New York's coastal
zone. They are flexible and inexpensive to apply compared to most structural
methods.

V. Suggested Management Alternatives by Reach

Management alternatives, structural and non-structural, are discussed
for the coastal zone reaches, with suggestions made on the best methods to
use, where appropriate.

VI. Programs Available for Management Implementation

Federal, State and local programs and powers for implementing suggested
management measures are briefly discussed.

VII. Generalized Hazard Area Management Model

A flow model will be developed for use by regional and local agencies
in identifying hazard areas and in deciding the proper management tool.
This model will be generalized for use in all of New York's coastal zone.

VIII. Conclusions

IX. Recommendations

Bibliography

1977
TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY

I. FLOODING AND EROSION PROCESSES

II. OVERVIEW OF FLOODING AND EROSION PROBLEMS IN NEW YORK STATE'S
COASTAL ZONE

III. AVAILABLE DATA SOURCES AND DATA GAPS

IV. MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES

V. SUGGESTED MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES BY REACH

VI. PROGRAMS AVAILABLE FOR MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION

VII. GENERALIZED HAZARD AREA MANAGEMENT MODEL

VIII. CONCLUSIONS

IX. RECOMMENDATIONS

BIBLI OGRAPHY

CHAPTER I

FLOODING AND EROSION PROCESSES

The principal causes--of the flooding and erosion problems in

the coastal zone are (1) the forces of nature, (2) the characteristics

of the shoreline areas subjected to these forces, and (3) the changes

imposed on the natural shoreline by man.

An understanding of the forces acting upon the coastal beach

and the resultants of these forces is essential to understanding why

flooding and erosion of the shoreline occur.

BEACH'PROCESSES

Much of the following description of beach processes is dervied

from the National Shoreline Study, "rShore Protection Guidelines,"

published by the U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers. While the focus of

this section is an the processes occurring on the marine coastline,

they are generally pertinent to the Great Lakes Shoreline. A following

section treats the flooding and erosion processes peculiar to the

Great Lakes and the riverine sections of the coastal zone.

Natural Processess

The natural forces which affect a coastal beach originate with

the sun and the moon. The sun, through uneven heating of the Earth,

causes air movements and winds. The moon, and to a lesser extent the

sun, create the tidal rise and fall of the ocean. The Great Lakes

have a small tidal range which has no significant effect on shoreline

flooding and erosion.

The familiar waves of the sea are wind waves generated by wind

blowing over the water. These waves cause most of the damage on our

coasts. The height, length and period of wind waves are determined

-2 -

by the fetch (the distance the wind blows over the body of water in

generating the waves), the speed of the wind, and the length of tine

that the wind blows. Generally, the longer the fetch, the stronger

the wind, and the longer the time that the wind blows over the water,

the larger the waves will be.

Currents are created when the water in one area becomes higher

than the water in another area. This condition could be caused by

tides, winds, changes in water temperature (which results in~a change

in water density), waves breaking on a beach and streams flowing into

the lake or ocean.

Lake Erie is subjected to phenomena called seiches. The lake

is shallow and its long axis runs east-west. Low barometric pressure at

the east and strong westerly winds cause a tilting of lake levels.

Water levels'are sometimes eight to ten feet higher at the east and

because of this phenonenon.

Beach Dynamics

The sediments of a beach are determined by the forces to which

the beach is exposed and the type of material available at the

shore. Most beaches are composed of very fine to vary coarse sand.

This sand is supplied to the beaches by streams, and by erosion of the

shores by waves and currents. Mud does not usually remain on the

beach~es because the waves create sufficient turbulance to keep these

fine particles in suspension. The particles then settle out in deeper

walter. Those beaches which are sheltered or are subjected to normally

Ajile waye actions do retain the finer particles and one can find mud

flats and marshes along their length.

0 ~~~Th~e primary agent causing onshore, offshore and along shore

movement of sand is the breaking wave. As the wave moves onto the

-3-

shore, it finally reaches a depth oft water which is so shallow that

the wave collapses or "breaks". This depth is equal to about 1.3

times the wave height. Breaking results in a sudden disipation of the

energy of the wave, which causes a great amount of turbulance in the

water, and stirs up the bottom materials. After breaking, the water

travels forward as a turbulent mass, expending its remaining energy in

a rush up the beach slope.

Wind waves affect the beaches in two major ways. Short, steep

waves, which usually occur during a storm near the coast, tend to

tear the beach down. However, when the storms are distant, the waves

are lower in height and their periods are lengthened by the time they

reach the coast. These gradual swells tend to move sand inshore,

rebuilding the beach. A series of storms occurring near the coast

in a short time period can result in severe erosion if there is not

sufficient time in between to rebuild the beaches. Alternate erosion

and accretion is seasonal on some beaches; the winter storms tear the

beach away and the summer swells rebuild it. Beaches may also follow

long term cyclic patterns. They may erode for several years, and

then accrete for several years. On the Great Lakes, this is a particular-

ly noticeable pattern, resulting mainly from the cyclic periods of high

and low lake levels.

The long shore current is very important in coastal processes

because it carries sand which has been stirred in-to suspension by the

turbidity of the breaking waves. The sand moved in this way is known

as "'littoral drift"l. The direction and violence of the wave attack

* ~determine the direction and magnitude of =the littoral transport at a

given time. For example, on a coast facing to the north, waves generated

-4-

by a northwest wind will produce a littoral drift to the east. Waves

emanating from the northeast would cause drift in the opposite direction.

The direction of drift will4 often reverse as the wind direction changes

but most shores consistantly have a net annual littoral transport in

one direction. It is important for the planner to take this into account

in his work, particularly the design of structures in the littoral zone.

The average annual net rate of littoral transport at a given

place is fairly regular from year to year unless man changes the shore,

and eliminates or reduces the supply of sand. The average annual rate

varies considerably from place to place. In landlocked water of limited

extent, such as the Great Lakes, the rate of littoral transport can

normally be expected to be no more than about 150,000 cubic yards per

year. For the open coasts of the oceans, the net rate of transport may

be from 100,000 to 2 million or more cubic yeards per year. The rate

depends on the local shore conditions and alignment as well as the energy

and direction of wave action in the area.

Barrier Beach Inlets

Inlets through marine barrier beaches have important effects on

adjacent shores by interrupting littoral transport of sand and trapping

the littoral drift. As littoral drift moves into the inlet, it narrows

the inlet. Increased tidal currents caused by the constriction then

pick up the littoral drift from the inlet. On the ebb current, the

sand is carried a short distance out to sea and deposited on an outer

bar. When this bar becomes large enough, the waves begin to break on

it. and the sand again begins to move along the bar toward the beach.

On the flood tide, when the water flows through the inlet into the

* ~lagoon, the littoral drift in the inlet is carried a short distance

into the lagoon and deposited, creating a shoal. Although some of the

material escapes this cycle and continues to the downdrift beach,

the overall effect of the inlet is to store sand and interrupt the

littoral transport process. Inlets to Great Lakes bays, such as

Irondequoit Bay or Lake Ontario, also interrupt the littoral drift.

The process is different because there is no appreciable tidal current.

Unless there is streamflow to flush it out, the inlet gradually shoals.

Hurricanes which occur along the Atlantic Ocean coastline,

and other severe storms occurring close to the coastline will change

beaches drastically. Such storms generate large, steep waves. These

waves take sand from the beach and carry it offshore, they move much

more sand than do oridinary waves. In addition, the strong winds of the

storm often create a storm surge. This surge raises the water level

and exposes higher parts of the beach not ordinarily vulnerable to

waves. Structures, inadequately protected and located too close to the

water, are then subjected to the forces of the waves and are often

completely destroyed. Storm surges are especially damaging if they

occur at the same time as high tide or, on the Great Lakes, during a

high water period.

The berm or berms of the beach are built naturally by waves to

an elevation approximating the highest point reached by normal storm

waves. While the berms tend to absorb the major forces of the waves,

overtopping permits waves to reach the dunes or bluffs in back of them

and damage unprotected manmade features.

When storm waves erode the berm and carry the sand offshore,

the protective value of the berm is reduced and large waves can overtop

the beach. The width of the berm at the time of a storm is thus an

* ~important factor in the amount of upland damage the storm can inflict.

ATLANTIC COASTAL FLOODING AND EROSION

S ~~~The south shore of New York City and Long Island is subjected

to severe flooding and erosion. The attitude of the shoreline, facing

south and projecting into the ocean from the line at the U.S. shoreline

to the south, makes it open and vulnerable to hurricanes and coastal

storms emanating from the south. The long, open fetch of ocean to the

south permits~the buildup of large waves during these storms. Hurricanes

occurring coincident with high tides can cause tidal levels of 15 to 20

feet above normal. These high levels and the accompanying wave run-up

can cause flooding a mile qr more inland in places.

GREAT LAKES FLOODING AND EROSION

The natural foreces and beach dynamics of the Great Lakes

shoreline are basically the same as those described in the section on

Beach Processes. Major storms are the forces which cause the most

damage and the largest changes in the shore. However, the Atlantic

Ocean is affected by tidal changes which occur twice a day. There

are no significant tidal effects on the Great Lakes, Water level

changes occur slowly, often over a period of years.

The source of Great Lakes water is rain and snow falling on

the lakes and on the tributary land areas. Seasonal fluctuations,

caused by the annual weather pattern, are superimposed on the long-term

variations caused by extended periods of below or above normal

precipitation. Unusual variations in the amount of water evaporated from

the lakes can also alter the lake levels significantly. Because of

the size of the Great Lakes and the limited amount of water their

5 ~outflow rivers can discharge, extreme high or low levels and flows

persist for a considerable time after the factors that cause them have

changed. Releases of water from Lake Superior a~nd Lake Ontario are

artificially controlled. The other lakes are naturally regulated.

Wave action works directly on the beach or at the toe of the

bank, eroding clay, silt, sand and gravel. This erosion is increased

when lake levels rise, because the beaches are narrower or submerged,

and the waves are able to attack the unprotected toe of the banks or

bluffs directly. Thus, a wide beach is the best protection the upland

shore can have from wave attack.

Seepage often comes through sandy layers in glacial till bluffs.

When underground water seeps out of exposed bluffs of unstable or loose

material, it causes slumping and further weakens the material. This

often results in large slides. Sometimes, man-made drainage works cause

problems with underground water.

On eof the most severe threats to the shore is erosion by frost

and ice. In certain of the fine-grained silty soils along the lakes,

the alternate freezing and thawing can weaken the soil and cause it to

slide. Frost and ice formation in fissures in clays, glacial tills,

or shale bluffs may contribute to their erosion. Shore ice is another

cause of damage when broken up and driven onto the beaches by on-shore

storms. Lake bottom material may be scoured out and structures are

often damaged. However, shore ice can be benefit, too. It protects

the shore from erosion by winter storms.

RIVERINE FLOQDINQ AND EROSIO0N

'Major flooding in the Niagara and Hudson Rivers coastal zones

i's ca~used by two factors, ice jamming and tributary flooding. Tributary

flooding results from intense rainfall, snowmelt and ice jammin~g.

Winter flooding is usually caused by a least two of these factors.

S ~Intense thunderstorms or extratropical storms cause most of the

problems in the summer.

Ice jamming occurs when there is a warm spell of weather

following a prolonged cold period. The warm weather, often accompanied

by rain, melts some of the snow pack. The runoff causes the stream level

to rise, breaking tb.\e ice into floes. The higher stream levels also

result in greater streamflow velocities. The ice flows downstream until

it reaches an obstruction. This could be an unbroken reach of ice or

a construction of the channel such as an island or bridge piers. Her

the ice jams, building out from the shore or submerging under the

stationary ice pack. Soon a dam is formed blocking the flow of water

behind it.

In the Niagar River, these ice james which occur upstream of

the hydroelectric plants at Niagara Falls can cause a serious

disruption of power production. The ice dams the stream, causing the

stream levels below to lower. The reduced head at the power plants

results in reduced power production. On the Hudson River, ice james not

only cause flooding but can interrupt navigation which normally occurs

year round.

Streambank erosion is not a major problem on either river. The

components of streambank erosion are., stream velocity, water level,

soil characteristics and attitude of the shoreline (the outside shore-

line on a curve in th-e stream erodes tend to be subject to more erosion

because of hi~her stream velocities 'Where). Other factors are ice and

navigation which can cause significant bank wash.

CHAPTER II
OVERVIEW OF FLOODING AND EROSION PROBLEMS IN NEW YORK'S COASTAL ZONE

DRAFT
RWW: j

Great Lakes

New York State has over 800 miles of coastline bordering the Great Lakes

and its connecting rivers. There are 71 miles of shoreline bordering Lake Erie

and 328 miles'along Lake Ontario. Added to this are 70 miles on the Niagara

River and 340 miles of mainland and island shoreline along the St. Lawrence

River.

The water levels of the Great Lakes are constantly changing. Winds and

barometric pressure changes can cause large, temporary fluctuations. Variances

from long-term average precipitation can have an impact on water levels years

beyond their duration.

Shoreline flooding and erosion damages are primarily caused by meteorological

events. The severity of the damage increases, generally, as the lake levels rise

toward the higher extremes of their natural ranges and permit storm-generated

waves to attack higher and deeper an the foreshore.

Man, in his desire to enjoy and utilize the shoreline and adjacent waters,

encroaches upon the vulnerable shoreland. Sometimes he is aware of the risk

I ~~involved but more often there is insufficient information available to him to

alert him to the hazards. Changes in lake levels, from one extreme to the other,

I ~ ~occur over a period seldom less than a decade. It is not easy for a shoreland
owner, with little knowledge of historic fluctation, to recognize the changes

that will inevitably occur.

The Great Lakes Region Inventory Report of the National Shoreline Study

estimates that., of New York's shoreline on Lakes Erie and Ontario, about 196

miles are subject to erosion. Seventeen of these miles sustain critical erosion;

that is, the shoreline has high value economic or recreational resources and a

historic record of rapid loss of land and/or structural damage. The Inventory

Report estimated that property damage caused by erosion during the 1951-52 high

water period amounted $120,000 on New York's Lake Erie shoreline and $6,400,000

-2-

on the Lake Ontario shoreline. Updated to 1970 evaluation, these damages

were $232,000 and $12,500,000 respectively. Three-fourths of the damage

on Lake Ontario occurred in Orleans and Monroe Counties.

The Corps of Engineers, at the request of the Great Lakes States, is

presently conducting an assessment of flooding and erosion damages on the

United States portion of the Great Lakes shoreline for the latest high water
period, 1972-1975. A41Iio td was conducted in 1975 in

11 Great Lakes counties, including Oswego County in New York State. The

St. Lawrence-Eastern Ontario Commission, subcontractor for the Corps of

Engineers, projected from its study of Oswego County that flood damages for

the period September, 1972 to September, 1974 totaled $1,290,000. Erosion

damages during the same period were put at $4,358,000.

As a further indication of the magnitude of flooding and erosion damages,

the St. Lawrence-Eastern Ontario Commission., in its report, "Lake Ontario and

the St. Lawrence River. Analysis of and Recommendations Concerning High Water

Levels," examined damages incurred by the storm of March 17-18, 1973. This

storm did severe damage to the Lake Ontario shorelineland the President declared

seven counties major disaster areas. it was found that by September, 1974, the

Small Business Administration had made loans for home and businesses of $22.9

million. Damages to state park and recreation facilities were put at one

million dollars.

These costs reflect damages to man-made structures. Damages to the

environment are much more difficult to quantify. The high water and the

resultant accelerated erosion removes much valuable beach area and farmland.

The resulting sediment clogs stream mouths and navigation channels.

-3-

A more particular look at flooding and erosion problems along the

New York State portions of the Lake Erieland Niagara River to the Wayne-

Cayuga County line, follows. The remainder of the Lake Ontario shoreline,

in C&yuga, Oswego and Jefferson Counties, and the New York shoreline of the

St. Lawrence River is being examined by the St. Lawrence-Eastern Ontario

commission.

Lake Erie - Lake Erie's shoreline is characterized by high erodible

bluffs. The average height of the shore bluffs is 40 to 50 feet but is as

much as 100 feet in short reaches. The lower part of the bluffs, generally

well above the limit of wave uprush, is shale. in some places, shale extends

the full height of the bluff, but more often the top half is unconsolidated.

For some distance on either side of river mouths the bluffs are lower and

may be entirely granular material or silt and clay. Narrow gravel and shingle

beaches, 40 to 50 feet wide at average lake levels, extend along some of the

shale bluff reaches. Several wider sandy beaches occur mainly between Silver

Creek and Cattaraugus Creek and in the Town of Evans. Except for these beaches

and occasional pockets of sand trapped by natural headlands or shore structures,

there is little sand in this entire reach. What there is, is usually a thin

layer over the shale bottom.

In general, the 4.aGaA,-taa 4 nty shoreline is used for agriculture or is

undeveloped. Between the Pennsylvania-New York State line and Van Buren point,

about 20 miles, there are only a few scattered residential developments. The

next nine miles of shoreline development from Van Buren point to two miles east

of Dunkirk consists of permanent and summer residences. Exceptions are the

commercial and industrial frontage in Dunkirk, and two city-owned parks, and

another one-quarter mile frontage in the harbor. Eight miles of shore between

-4-

Dunkirk and Silver Creek contain only scattered residential areas. The

shoreline from Silver Creek to the County line at the mouth of Cattaraugus

Creek is a highly developed summer resort area.

The Lake Erie shoreline of Erie County between Cattaraugus Creek and

Lackawanna, a distance of approximately 22 miles, is a highly developed

residential area. There are occasional open spaces, including Evangola State

Park and approximately seven smaller public recreation areas. The shoreline

of Lackawanna and Buffalo, to the mouth of the Buffalo River is used for

heavy industry and commercial purposes.

Lake Erie has the shallowest maximum depth of all the Great Lakes, only

210 feet. The 30-foot depth contour is approximately one mile offshore all

around the shoreline, which contributes to the great fluctuations in water

level. These fluctuations are greater than those on any of the other Great

Lakes. Strong winds blowing along the axis of the lake can create seiches

that have been known to lower the water level at one end of the lake by

eight feet or more, while the water depth of harbors at the other end of

the lake rises several feet.

Because of the relative stability of the high shale bluffs, erosion

and flooding problems in Chautauqua and Erie counties are few. Erosion of

the bluffs and deterioration from weathering and frost action do occur, and

improvements close to the top of the bluffs become threatened.

Flooding occurs almost annually at the mouth of Cattaraugus Creek with

some years having more than one flood. Littoral drift in Lake Erie forms

a sandbar across the mouth of the Creek in the summer which frequently causes

ice jams and flooding in the spring. The Corps of Engineers conducted a

* ~Flood Plain Information Study of Cattaraugus Creek in 1968. Maps in the

-5-

report show the extent of creek related flooding during the Standard Project

and Intermediate Regional Floods.

A Federal navigation and flood control improvement project was authorized

by Congress for Cattaraugus Creek in 1968. The principal purpose of the project

is to open the lower end of the creek for development as a small-boat harbor.

it is also designed to reduce flooding in Sunset Bay. The project provides

for breakwaters in Lake Erie to protect the approaches to the creek mouth;

an entrance channel between the breakwaters and into the creek, 8 feet deep,

100 feet wide and about 1,900 feet long, ter minating in an irregular-shaped

maneuvering area about 300 by 600 feet in size., and 6 feet deep; and an inner

channel above the maneuvering area, 6 feet deep, 100 feet wide, and about 1,900

feet long. It also provides for a number of ancillary features for flood

control and to facilitate public use of the breakwater structures for recreational

fishing. Estimated costs for the project are $2,760,000 federal and $1,210,000

non-federal. Construction of the project is scheduled to start in 1977 and be

completed in 1978.

Due to the influence of westerly storms, the lake levels at the east end of

Lake Erie are subject to large temporary changes. A temporary rise of five feet

occurs on an average of once a year. Changes of seven or eight feet are not

uncommon. Flooding of low areas, including some of the docks in Buffalo Harbor,

occasionally occurs during the most extreme changes. These extreme changes also

increase the erosion , because larger waves can reach shore. Thus, heavier and

higher protections are needed here than at any other point on Lake Erie, where

changes are much less. Because these temporary changes are taken into account

when docks and other shore installations are built, there is little, if any,

damage from flooding at still water levels, even during high lake levels.

-6-

The Corps of Engineers has also constructed a flood control project on

Smokes Greek in the City of Lackawanna. The project, completed in 1971,

consisted of deepening and minor realignment of both branches and the main

channel of the creek and protects the city against a flood equal to the

maximum of record.

Niagara River

The, Niagara River has been described as, in reality not a river, but a

strait connecting Lake Erie with Lake Ontario. The drainage area, which

includes all of the Great Lakes except Ontario, is 260,400 square miles and

the flow is consequently quite large, averaging 202,000 cubic feet per second.

Flow in the river is directly dependent upon the water level of Lake Erie and

because the lake is large and surface elevation fluctuations occur over an

extended period of time, this results in a stable river flow. The exception

to this is when high winds from a westerly direction increase lake levels.

The velocity of the river is very swift along the rapids above Niagara Falls

and in the gorge below, reaching speeds of 30 to 40 feet per second. Above

and below these areas, however, the current averages four feet per second and

navigation is feasible in these reaches.

The principal erosion problem along the Niagara River is the Niagara

Falls. The Falls, originally located along the Niagara escarpment, have eroded

over geologic time about seven miles to the south, forming an extensive gorge

in their path. The rate of erosion has varied, greatly during this time, being

dependent upon the variation in size of the upper lakes during and between

glacial epoches. The current rate is about three and one-half feet per year.

The Fallstare a great tourist attraction. Concern has been expressed

that continued erosion of the crest of the American Falls, and the resultant

pile-up of debris at its base, will reduce its specticular beauty. The Corps

-7-

of Engineers undertook a study in 1969 of the erosion problem. The study,

completed in 1974, did not recommend that any remedial work be done.

Other erosion problems occur in the rapids section above the Falls

where swift currents cause some minor erosion problems at beaches and

docks.

Flooding is'not a major problem along the Niagara River, although the

Flood Hazard Boundary Maps indicate that scattered developed areas are in the

100-year flood plain. The Corps of Engineers have conducted a flood plain

information study of Tonawanda Creek, the major tributary to the Niagara River.

The study provides flood plain information for the area of the coastal zone

which is part of the Tonawanda Creek drainage area, at its junction with the

Niagara River. The report indicates that this part of the coastal zone is

subject to flooding under only the most extreme combination of hydrological

and meteorological events deemed possible.

Lake Ontario

New York's Lake Ontario shoreline extends from the mouth of the Niagara

River easterly for approximately 160 miles. The shoreline then diverts to a

north - south direction to the headwaters of the St. Lawrence River at Tibbett's

Point. Total shoreline length, including islands, is about 328 miles.

The westerly 75 miles of shoreline from the Niagara River to the vicinity

of Rochester, is fairly regular, with few embayments or indentations. Bluffs,

from 20 to 60 feet high, parallel the shoreline for most of this reach. The

bluffs, for the most part, are composed of glacial deposits consisting of till of

various forms and layered drift i~n the form of kames, eskers and sheets of

outwash sand and gravel. The bluffs are open to wave attack, frost action,

seepage, and surface erosion. Bedrock rises from about 10 feet below lake

level, just east of the mouth of the Niagara River, to about 25 feet above

lake level at Thirty Mile Point, near the Niagara-Orleans county line. Rock

outcrops occur above lake level just east of Olcott Harbor.

The beaches generally are too narrow to provide much protection.

Only a small amount-of residual material from erosion of the bluffs is

coarse enough to remain in the beach zone and this accounts in part, for

the lack of wider beaches.

The shore turns low and marshy for about 20 miles between Hamlin Beach

State Park and Rochester Harbor with barrier sand and gravel beaches separating

ponds and marshes from Lake Ontario. From Rochester to Sodus Bay there is a

nearly continuous bluff line. The bluffs, composed of silt and clay and rising

up to 70 feet above the lake, are eroding where they are unprotected. The

beaches again are too narrow to provide much protection averaging ten to thirty

feet in width. Ledge rock is generally no more than three feet above normal

lake level in Wayne County.

The easterly 15 miles of shore in Wayne County, between Sodus Bay and

Little Sodus Bay, are a series of drumlins (low, narrow hills of glacial till)

separated by marshes that extend several miles inland along small creeks that

enter the lake. The drumlins are up to 150 feet high above lake level and one-

quarter to one-half mile wide at their base. The material at the bluff face of the

eroding drumlins is glacial till, containing from about 10 to 100 percent sand

and gravel. Lake Bluff, just east of Sodus Bay, and Chimney Bluff, two miles

farther east., are two of the highest. The former has houses dangerously close

to the top of the receding bluff. The latter is undeveloped and is in State

park property. Narrow sand and gravel barrier beaches have formed across the

low marsh areas or open water between the drumlins.

Shoreline use is about 50-60 percent residential. From 20-30 percent of

the land is in agriculture or undeveloped. The remaining shore is primarily

recreation land. Recent trends have shown an increase in the land use for

-9-

park and residential purposes with a corresponding decrease in agricultural

use or undeveloped land.

on ~~~The westerly 20 miles of shore, from the Niagara River to a mile east of

Olcott Harbor, are quite generally developed, with a fringe of summer and

permanent residences along the lake shore. The upland is in agricultural use.

Between Olcott and the Niagara-Orleans County line, residential developments

are more widely scattered and the shore is generally in agricultural use or

undeveloped. There are four State parks in Niagara County, Fort Niagara,

Four-Mile Creek, Wilson-Tuscarora, and Golden Hill State Park, with a shoreline

frontage of about three and three-fourths miles. Local parks and other public

and semipublic developments occupied 2.3 miles of shoreline in 1971.

The shore of Orleans County has a fringe of residential development along

a little over one-half of its frontage. The remainder is mostly open space,

either agricultural or undeveloped, or park lands. Twenty miles of Monroe County

are in residential use., about seven miles are park land, and the remainder is

undeveloped or used for commercial and industrial purposes. There is one State

park located in Orleans County, Lakeside Beach, and two in Monroe County, Hamlin

Beach and Braddock Bay State Park. Lakeside Beach has about 1.5 miles of frontage

on Lake Ontario, most of which is along a high, unprotected bluff. Hamlin Beach

is an older park and has about three miles of frontage, part of which is protected.

The other main public parks in Monroe County are: Ontario Beach Park, just west

of the U.S. West Pier at Rochester Harbor, owned by the City of Rochester; Durand

Eastman Park, between Rochester Harbor and Irondequoit Bay, owned by the City of

Rochester but leased to Monroe County; and Webster Park, a county park about four

miles east of Irondequoit Bay.

The upland shore of Wayne County is used mainly for agricultural purposes.

Fruit is the principal crop. A fringe of scattered residential development

borders the lakeshore. Chimney Bluffs State Park, just east of Sodus Bay, has

a frontage of nearly two miles.

The erosion and flooding history of the south shore of Lake Ontario is

one of continual and extensive damages to the shorelands and the development

on them. The loose bluff material of Niagara County is very open to erosion.

A beach erosion study made about 35 years ago reported that in the 64-year

period between 1875 and 1939 the highest rate of erosion, which occurred

around Wilson Harbor, was nearly five feet per year. The erosion did not

occur at a uniform rate and was accelerated during-pexiods of high lake levels.

Erosion rates in the easterly half of the county are much slower. However, it

was found necessary to protect the lighhouse at Thirty-Mile Point with heavy

stone revetment. This was done because of deterioration and erosion of the

shale outcrop at the lake shore, which at this point appears as high and strong

as any point in the county.

Significant erosion of the bluffs, particularly just west of Wilson, but

throughout the entire length of the Niagara County shore, occurred during the

1951-52 high water period. There was also flooding of some of the commercial

fishing docks at Wilson Harbor and of other low docks and land areas in Wilson

and Olcott harbors.

A little over five miles of the Niagara County shoreline was protected as

of 1971. This amount may have increased because of the high water period of

the early 1970's. About 0.8 mile of this is stone revetment along the highway

east of Wilson. Most of the protective structures are stone revetment or

concrete seawalls. Groins have been constructed in a few places, at Krull

Park for instance, just east of Olcott. The Corps of Engineers, under its

Operation Foresight program which was in effect from December 1972 to June

1974, constructed 1;600 feet of temporary diking at Olcott Harbor to protect

that area during the current high water period.

The shores of Orleans and Monroe Counties suffered significant erosion

and flood damage during the 1951-52 high water period and again in the early

1970's. During the earlier period, properties along the low shore between

Hamlin Beach State Park and Rochester Harbor were the most heavily damaged.

Summer homes and permanent residences on the barrier beaches were flooded

for several months, and many suffered from wave action and erosion.

The existing protection provided by private property owners in Orleans

and Monroe Counties is mostly stone revetment or concrete seawalls. Groins

have been built at Hamlin Beach and Braddock Bay State parks to improve the

recreational bathing beaches. Their effectiveness has been limited, due to

the low rate of littoral drift, particularly at Braddock Bay. The Corps, under

Operation Foresight, constructed 2,000 linear feet of temporary dikes in Orleans

County and 10,500 linear feet in Monroe County between December 1972 and June

1974.

The shore of Wayne County is subject to significant erosion where

unprotected, except for a few short reaches where bedrock rises high enough

above lake level to armor the toe of the bluff against wave attack. Significant

flooding also occurred during the 1951-52 laigh water period in low areas,

particularly in Sodus Bay and around other bays, ponds and barrier beaches.

About 0.8 mile of shore in the county was protected as of 1966, principally

by stone revetments and concrete seawalls.

-12-

Following is a brief description of the beach erosion control projects

either constructed or authorized for construction by the Corps of Engineers

on Lake Ontario.

The following table lists the beach erosion control studies currently

being conducted by the Corps of Engineers.

Beach Erosion Control Studies - Lake Ontario

Approximate Date
Name Purpose to be Completed

Durand-.Eastman To determine the advisability Indefinite
Park at Rochester of undertaking measures for
control of shore erosion along
the Lake Ontario frontage of
the park

South Shore of To determine the advisability
Lake Ontario of undertaking measures for
control of shore erosion at
several publicly-owned lake
frontages, and related improve-
ments for light draft craft

Interim Report. Fort Niagara Favorable report
State Park submitted by
District Engineer
in 1968

Interim Report. Golden Hill Indefinite
State Park

Braddock Bay State To determine the advisability Indefinite
Park, Cranberry & of providing improvements for
Long Ponds light-draft. Craft at these
localities and adopting certain
measures for control of shore
erosion

-13-

Fort Niagara State Park -Fort Niagara State Park is located on the

south shore of Lake Ontario at the mouth of the Niagara River. The property,

formerly a U.S. Military Reservation, was acquired in 1964 by the State of

New York for park development under the jurisdiction of the Niagara Frontier

State Park Commission. The cooperative beach erosion plan was authorized by

the S-~nate and House Public Works Committee in December, 1970, under provisions

of the Flood Control Act of 1965. The authorized project provides for the

construction of a low offshore breakwater about 4,000 feet long to protect

a bathing beach that is to be improved by placement of 162,000 cubic yards

of sand fill. The total estimated first cost is $3,540,000.

Hamlin Beach State Park -Hamlin Beach State Park, under jurisdiction

of the Genesee State Park Commission, is located on the south shore of Lake

Ontario, about 20 miles west of Rochester Harbor. The cooperative beach

erosion control project by the State of New York and the Federal Government

authorized in July 1958, provides for restoration and protection of the westerly

beach area at the park by alteration of two existing scone groins and one

existing concrete groin, construction of four new groins, grading of the

nearly vertical bluffs behind the beach to a stable slope, and placement

of approximately 217,000 cubic yards of sand fill. Total project oost is

estimated at $2,790,000. Construction began in July 1973 and was completed

The Corps of Engineers have also conducted a Flood Plain Information

Study of portions of Irondequoit Creek, including its junction with Irondequoit

bay. This Report presents a brief history of flooding and identifies th~ose

areas subject to possible future floods.

DRAFT

LONG ISLAND SOUND

Reach I - Westch ester County

This reach covers.New York State's part of the northerly shoreline of

Long Island Sound from Throgs Neck to Connecticut, including a portion of

Bronx County. The coastal area is subject to a moderate amount of flooding

from Long Island Sound and from several tributary streams. The shoreline

is rocky in many locations and erosion is not a problem in this reach.

Coastal flooding is generally caused by hurricanes and severe extra-

tropical storms which generate strong winds and high water levels. Damages

from tidal flooding were estimated in 1965 to be less than three million

dollars from the recurrence of the storm of record, the hurricane of

September 1938.

There are five principal streams which cross the coastal zone and enter

the Sound in this reach: Hutchinson River, Mamaroneck River, Beaver Swamp

Brook, Byram River and Blind Brook. Extensive urban development has taken

place in their drainage areas in recent years. As a result, swampy areas have

been filled and extensive areas have been paved. This has decreased the

natural storage areas available and has resulted in faster runoff of pre-

cipitation to the streams. Other factors contributing to flooding are

inadequate channel capacity, poor channel alignment, low bridges and channel

silting and obstructions.

A large proportion of the coastal area is residential, occupied by

relatively high-income people. The grounds subject to flooding are usually

limited to the waterfront property only, and are generally developed and

maintained to the water's edge, including seawall protection. Residences

are primarily on high ground, and damage is limited to grounds and shore

installations. Beach and boat clubs, public and semi-publi c parks, and

commercial enterprises such as boatyards, which are necessarily located on

the shore, are subject to severe damages from hurricane tides.

The major portion of these facilities are located in the harbors along

the coast which provide a degree of protection during lesser storms. Small

craft harbors are located at Mamaroneck, New Rochelle and Port Chester.

Reach 2 -Nassau County

* ~~~~To Come

DRAFT

Reach 3 - Suffolk County

The problem in this reach consists of damage to shorefront property and

shore erosion by wave action accompanied by inundation of low-lying areas during

hurricanes and intense extratropical storms. Shore erosion has caused the loss

of protective shore structures and of beach and bluff areas with subsequent

structural damages to buildings and roads. Tidal inundation of residences and

businesses has required the evacuation of people from affected areas. Damages

resulting from wave attack and beach erosion have occurred throughout the entire

reach, whereas damages from tidal flooding have occurred primarily at Port

Jefferson and vicinity, at Asharoken Beach, and at several low-lying beach

developments.

The shoreline west of Port Jefferson to Nassau County is highly irregular,

indented by several deep harbors and bays. These bays occupy drowned river

valleys. They are separated by peninsulas or necks which project into Long

Island Sound. The narrow beaches of the necks are backed in some areas by

cliffs or bluffs. The bluffs are mainly composed of glacial till and outwash.

Bluff height is generally low, about 30 feet, in the extreme western

portion of the island near Manhasset and Little Neck Bays, and increases to

between 75 and 110 feet at Lloyd Point, Eatons Neck and the Nissequogue area.

Further east the bluffs are less elevated - about 85 feet at Crane Neck Point

and 35 feet at Old Field Point with small pocket beaches located between the

projecting points of the necks.

Elevations increase abruptly from 200 feet to 295 feet in the centers of

the necks and in the regions at the heads of the harbors. Eroded material has

formed spits, baymouth bars and tombolos (bars which connect offshore islands

to the mainland). Dune sands are frequently associate~d with these depositional

* forms. Marshes, such as those at Stony Brook Harbor, Flax Pond and West Meadow

Beach, generally occupy small depressions in the coast and are separated from

the Sound by beach deposits.

East of Port Jefferson, the shoreline is comprised of gently curved beaches

separated by headland areas which project only a slight distance seaward of the

O general shore trend. For the most part, the headlands are associated with high

bluffs, such as the 140 foot elevation at Herod Point.

The bluffs are more continuous than those to the west. In general, bluff

height decreases from Port Jefferson to Orient Point. Between Port Jefferson

and Herod Point, the bluff height ranges from 100 to 140 feet. East of Herod

Point, bluff height gradually decreases, reaching about 30 feet near Orient

Point. Marshes and beach deposits, such as those found at Mt. Sinai Harbor,

Wading River and Fresh Pond, have accumulated in depressions where the bluff

is discontinuous.

The, shore erosion problem in this reach is very severe. The high projecting

headlands and bluffs which characterize the shore are generally fronted by low,

narrow beaches which provide insufficient protection against erosion from tidal

action and wave attack. Littoral drift being carried by along shore currents

generally is not providing sufficient nourishment for beaches. Slopes which

have become denuded of vegetation and have eroded as a result of unstable

conditions at the toe of the slope, are further eroded by surface runoff

resulting from rainfall. In some cases natural springs flow out through

exposed water bearing aquifers in the slope faces. The saturation of

unconsolidated bluff materials results in slides of bluff segments. Residential

development along the shore of the study area has increased sharply during the

past 20 years and much of it was constructed very close to the top edge of the

bluff slopes. Erosion has undetermined many *of these residences and threatens

to undermine more with the passting of time.

Much residential and business development has also been built up in

low-lying areas along the shores of barrier bars joining headlands or fronting

tidal marshes. Asharoken Beach, Fresh Pond, Port Jefferson, Wading River Landing,

* Luce Landing and Hashamomuck Beach are examples of such areas. Erosion of these

shores due to wave attack and overtopping has resulted in damages to the shorefront

development. During hurricanes or infrequent northeastern storms, damage to all

shorefront development equal to the average loss normally occurring over a 10 year

period. Analysis of shoreline and offshore depth contour meovements over 128 years

of record confirms such significant losses of shore due to erosion.

The shoreline of this reach is receding at an average rate of between 1.0 and

2.0 feet per year. Some locations such as at Eatons Neck, Waterside Park, Fort Salonga,

Crane Neck and Old Field Points, Mt. Misery and Mattituck Hills have experienced

severe recessions of up to 3.5 feet per year. The shoreline from Miller-Place to

Mattituck Inlet, fronted primarily by high bluffs lying in long and gently curved

reaches, has generally experienced a constant recession of about 2.0 feet per year.

Shoreline accretion has occurred primarily at locations where wave-built forms such

as sand spits and barrier bars exist. At some of these locations such as Lloyd Neck,

East Fort and Eatons Neck Point, Sunken Meadow State Park, Port Jefferson Harbor,

and at Mr. Sinai Harbor, the bars or spits have experienced migrations of considerable

magnitude.

Over a period of 128 years, for which records are available, offshore depth

contours have generally moved landward. This factor is important because deeper

water closer to shore allows larger waves to reach the beach, causing increased

erosion. In the vicinity of offshore shoals at projecting headlands, however,

there has been a seaward movement of these contours of up to 3,500 feet during

short periods. In general, the retreat of the shoreline has been more consistent

than that of the offshore depth contours which have experienced massive advances

and retreats at various times during the period of record. Advances of offshore

is depth contours have occurred in the vicinities of offshore shoals. Undoubtedly,

much of the materials eroded from the headlands and bluffs is being deposited in

the shoals.

Mapping of older hydrographic surveys shows the existence of many short

structures such as groins and jetties by 1885. The Corps of Engineers in their

* survey of the north shore of Suffolk County tabulated 236 groins, 14 jetties and

46,480 linear feet of seawalls, revetments and bulkheads in place in the mid-1960's.

Artificial nourishment operations have been accomplished only at Asharoken Beach

in 1960 and 1964 in the amount of 840,000 cubic yards, and at Sunken Meadow State

Park in 1957 in the amount of 57,000 cubic yards..

The Corps evaluated these protective structures and found that they varied

widely in effectiveness. Generally, the structures built by public interests were

in better condition and more effective than those constructed by private interests.

The private structures varied widely in design and construction. The lack of

coordinated planning between individual private property owers has resulted in

segmented protection in shore reaches. In many cases the installed protection

has been rendered ineffective by erosion of the upland shore, flanking the

structures. Failure to provide for control of rainfall runoff on bluff slopes

has resulted in severe erosion and slope failures.

The groins have been generally effective only in holding beaches, but not

in building them up. This condition is primarily due to an inadequate supply

of sand in the along shore littoral drift.

Placement of sand fill to restore and widen beaches has not been a frequently

used measure on the north shore. The State of New York placed two large fills at

Asharoken Beach. The losses of fill material have been very large.

As noted, hurricanes and intense extratropical storms are the principal

cause of flooding along the coast. Hurricanes produce the highest water levels

which results in the greatest area of tidal inundation. Extratropical storms

can cause greater damage than hurricanes at lower tidal levels. The duration of

some of these storms can be several days, whereas most hurricanes pass through the

O area within a time span of several hours. The timing of the arrival of a storm

is very important. If the peak of a storm occurs during a high tide, flooding

will be more extensive than if it occurred at another time.

Hurricane Carol, which struck the Long Island area an August 31, 1954,

produced the highest recorded water levels on the Suffolk County north shore.

Tidal inundation extended over approximately 2,600 acres. Significant~flooding

occurred at Lloyd Harbor, Asharoken Beach, Crab Meadow, Sunken Meadow State Park,

Flax Pond, Port Jefferson Harbor and the immediate vicinity of Mt. Sinai Harbor

and Hashamomuck Beach.

Land use in the area subjected to flooding is primarily residential, recreational

and commercial. These types of development suffer a very high proportion of total

damages. Although no lives were lost as a result of Hurricane Carol, over $700,000

(1954 prices) of primary physical and non-physical damage occurred in the north

shore area. Damage was extensive to residential and commercial buildings, waterfront

facilities and small craft. Beach erosion and damages to shore protective structures

were extensive. A recurrence of the tidal heights of Hurricane Carol would cause

considerably more damage today because of the increased number of residential and

commercial structures.

There are no existing improvements in the area designed to protect against

hurricane flood inundation. Some existing shore protection works provide protection

against tidal inundation during occurrences of spring tides.

ATLANTIC OCEAN

To Come

CHAPTER V
SUGGESTED MANAGEMENT ALTERNAIVES BY REACH

GREAT LAKES

To Come

DRAFT

LONG ISLAND SOUND

Reach I - Westchester County

The Corps of Engineers examined the potential for constructing structural

protection during their Interim Hurricane Study (2) of the Sound north shore

coastal area. The Study, which examined the most vulnerable areas of the reach,

showed that protective structures for prevention of damages from tides and

waves that would accompany major hurricanes and other severe storms would not

be feasible for economic and practical reasons. The normal annual maintenance

of grounds has taken care of most of the damage resulting from brief tidal

flooding, and the properly maintained seawalls have withstood the effects of

tidal inundation and wave action during past storms.

The report recommended that non-structural measures were the best available

means of reducing flood damages in the reach. Foremost among these measures

is the formulation of an adequate hurricane preparedness plan. The National

Weather Service has made significant improvements in detecting and forecasting

storms in recent years. These warnings receive broad dissemination by the

information media. However, a hurricane preparedness plan is a local responsibility.

It is essential that procedures for evacuation of flood prone areas and maintenance

of emergency services are properly planned in advance to avoid confusion during a

storm_.

All seven communities in the reach have entered the emergency phase of the

National Flood Insurance Program. Flood insurance studies, to bring these communities

into the regular program, are underway with scheduled completion dates in either

1976 or 1977 (see Table __). Entrance into the regular flood insurance program

will provide adequate insurance coverage for most of the propert ies in the flood

hazard areas. Most of the shoreland property in this reach is developed and,

consequently, land use regulations are of limited effectiveness. However, it

may be desirable to examine zoning regulations, building codes and other land

* ~use regulations in a later phase of the Coastal Zone Management program to

determine their impact on land use in the flood hazard areas. Deficiencies

should be reported to-the local communities.

Reach 2 Nassau County

To Come

DRAFT

Reach 3 -Suffolk County

The Corps survey of the north shore of Suffolk County examined the

* ~~technical and economic feasibility of structural measures to alleviate

flooding and erosion problems in this reach. Generally, it was found that

most of the beaches are undergoing erosion and other beaches no longer

exist above high water because of erosion. To correct this condition, it

would be necessary to widen and restore the beaches by artificial placement

of beach fill. Periodic nourishment of the beaches would be required to

maintain their effectiveness. Periodic nourishment is also useful in pre-

serving the barrier bar beaches and spits which provide protection to back-

shore areas. An alternate method to direct placement of sand is the

establishment of a feeder beach at the updrift end of the shore from which

beach material can be distributed by the natural littoral drift. If losses

of beach fill are excessively high, then groins may be considered to hold and

retard the loss of the restored beach. In this case, provision should be

made in the design of the groins to allow bypassing of beach material to

nourish the downdrift shore.

Erosion of the toe of bluffs by wave wash or attack can be corrected by

the construction of protective structures such as stone mounds, revetments and

bulkheads, or by the restoration of a protective beach or by a combination of

these. Where such protective works are to be constructed along the toe of

bluffs, their installation should be as continuous and as uniform as possible

to preclude the bypassing of the protection. When this condition exists, erosion

of the backshore occurs along the unprotected areas and eventually results in a

deterioration of the adjacent protective works. Also the ends of the constructed

works should tie into high ground to prevent flanking by waves and erosion of

the upland shore. Erosion of the slopes of bluffs by rainfall runoff can be

corrected by grading or restoring the slope to a natural angle of repose, by

constructing intercepting drainage ditches and by planting with shrubs and

grasses indigenous to the area. If a greater degree of protection is desired,

a blanket of appropriately sized stones can be placed on the slope,

0 ~~~Shore areas which have a concentration of development, and which are

subject to flooding by tidal inundation during severe storms or hurricanes,

can be protected by the construction of dunes, levees or floodwalls along the

affected shores and barriers across inlets, bays or harbors to repress high

tides and waves, or by a combination of these measures.

More particularly, three protection projects were found to be economically

and technically feasible to construct in this reach.

A shore protection improvement project was recommended for construction

at Sunken Meadow State Park, including the shore at Callahan's Beach consisting

of.

- beach restoration and widening by artificial placement of

approximately 1,000,000 cubic yards of beach fill along 2.6

miles of shorefront with a berm at an elevation of 13.0 feet

above mean low water and a width of 100 feet along the easterly

2,250 feet of shore, thence a width of 150 feet in the central

5,900 feet of shore generally fronting the boardwalk area, and

thence a width of 100 feet along the westerly 5,300 feet of

shore fronting a bluff area;

- construction of a 560-foot long stone terminal jetty at the

Nissequogue River;

- construction of five groins, if the need is demonstrated by

experience, to hold the restored beach;

- appurtenant works required for recreational fishing off the

jetty.

The total first cost of the project was estimated at $4,392,000

(March 1969 prices). The Federal government would pay 68.3 percent

($3,000,000) with New York State providing the remainder. The Federal

government would also pay 68.3 percent of the cost of periodic beach

nourishment, if needed, for a period not exceeding ten years. This

project has not been actively pursued, although it could be reactivated

by the Corps if requested by State interests.

Projects were also determined to be feasible for Caumsett and Wildwood

State Parks. However, because of lack of State interest, these projects

were not pursued. Plans forimprovement of hurricane protection were considered

for Asharoken Beach and Port Jefferson Harbor but were found to be not

economically justifiable. In problem areas such as Old Field Point, Scotts

Beach and Wading River Landing the State has constructed shore protection

improvements. Ero sion problems at Short Beach and Cedar Beach have been

corrected by spoiling of beach material dredged from adjacent harbors.

Detailed considered was not given to problem areas where there was

insufficient public ownership or use. However, plans of improvement and

corrective measures that may be undertaken by local interests were suggested

for these problems.

Shore protection improvements were considered for Caumsett and Wildwood

State Parks, respectively, located on Lloyd Neck in the town of Huntington

and in Wildwood in the town of Riverhead. The plans provided for restoration

and widening of beaches fronting high bluffs by the artificial placement of

beach fill, and the construction of terminal structures to reduce losses of

beach materials. The plans in these areas were found to be feasible. However,

local interests requestdd that no further consideration be given to improvements

there at this time.

At Asharoken Beach in the town of Huntingston, a hurricane flood

protection improvement was considered. The plan provides for construction

of a sand dike extending along the LongIsland So und and Northport Bay

shores to protect the low-lying area in the village of Asharoken against

tidal inundation. A preliminary analysis indicated that the plan was not

economically feasible. At Port Jefferson Harbor in the town of Brookhaven

a hurricane flood protection improvement was also considered. The plan

provided for construction of a barrier with a gated navigation opening

across the harbor entrance and sand dikes extending along the alignments

of the barrier bars to Old Field Point on the west side and to Mt. Misery

on the east side. The gated opening would be closed during storms to

prevent a tidal rise in the waters of Port Jefferson Harbor and in the

connecting waters of Setauket Harbor, Little Bay and Conscience Bay. A

preliminary analysis indicated that the plan was not economically feasible.

In those areas where a Federal project could not be economically

justified, suggested plans of improvement and corrective measures were

presented for possible implementation by local interests. It was recommended

that in the event local interests should proceed with any plan or corrective

action, a qualified engineer should be employed to make a detailed study of the

conditions as the basis of the improvement and to make a detailed design and

plan.

Lloyd Beach and West Neck Road, village of Lloyd Harbor. The elevation

of West Neck Road which connects Lloyd Neck to the mainland portion of Lloyd

Harbor, could be raised to permit passage during extreme storms and hurricanes.

The side slopes of the road should be revetted to prevent erosion and under-

mining of its foundation.

Valley Grove area, west shore of Eatons Neck. A wide protective beach

fronting the high eroding bluffs may be provided in the Valley Grove area.

If needed, groins may be installed to retain the restored beach. Restoration

of the bluff slope by placement of fill to gentler grades is necessary to

protect the residential development from damage through undermining. In

connection with the bluff restoration, the construction of bulkheads or

stone mounds may be required at the toe of the bluffs, where a wide band

of clay is exposed. Also, the planting of grasses and woody plants and top

of bank drainage ditches would help to control surface runoff on the slope.

U.S. Coast Guard Station, Eatons Neck Point. The high eroding bluff

on the east side of Batons Neck Point may be restored and protected by

construction of a stone mound in front of the bluff toe and filling in back

of the mound to form a gentler slope. Grasses and woody plants may be planted

on the restored slope to help control surface runoff. Also, periodic nourishment

of the fronting beach would help reduce wave attack at the toe of the bluff.

Waterside Park shore, Northport. A wide protective beach fronting the

bluffs may be restored by artificial placement of beach fill in those parts

of this area where needed. Groins may be considered to help retain the restored

beach.

Fort Salonga area of Northport (west of Fresh Pond). A wide protective

beach may be restored along 3,500 feet of shore west of Fresh Pond in the town

of Huntington, by the artificial placement of beach fill. The beach would

afford protection to the eroding bluff at the Indian Hill golf course, the

landing and low area on its east side, and to the residential shorefront

development up to Fresh Pond. Construction of groins may be considered to

reduce losses of beach fill. Bluff slopes may be restored or cut back to

gentler grades, and planted with grasses and woody plants to reduce erosion

by rainfall runoff.

Fresh Pond. The low-lying barrier beach at Fresh Pond may be raised to

protect the residential development on the bar and along the pond shore against

damages from tidal inundation during severe storms or hurricanes.

Nissequogue. The high eroding bluff headlands at Nissequogue could be

protected by restoration of the fronting beach through the artificial placement

of beach fill. Once protection is afforded at the toe of the bluffs, the slopes

should be allowed to reach a natural angle of repose and then planted with grasses

and woody plants to control surface runoff. The beach may also be nourished

periodically.

West Meadow Beach. The barrier beach which constitutes West Meadow Beach

could be raised and widened by artificial placement of beach fill to protect

the shorefront cottage development against damages from wave attack and tidal

inundation. The construction of terminal structures such as groins or jetties

may be considered at the southerly end of the beach to reduce losses of beach

materials into Porpoise Channel. Also, a feeder beach or sand stockpile could

be placed along oart of the northerly section to provide nourishment.

Crane Neck. The high eroding bluff headland at Crane Neck could be

protected by the artificial placement of a protective fronting beach.

Following the placement of beach fill, bluff slopes should be allowed to

reach a natural angle of response and then planted to reduce erosion from

surface runoff. Construction of groins may be considered to hold the beach

at Crane Neck Point.

Flax Pond. The barrier bar beaches at Flax Pond could be raised to

reduce damage to the residential development around the pond and to the

pond's ecology from tidal inundation during extreme storms.

Village of Old Field, between Flax Pond and Old Field Point. The beach

in this area may be restored by artificial placement of beach fill to protect

the eroding bluffs and backshore development. The bluff slopes may be restored

or cut back to gentler grades, and then planted with vegetation to reduce

runoff erosion.

0 ~~~Old Field Point. The bluff slope above the existing riprap revetment

could be stabilized by cutting it back to a more gentler grade and then

planting with vegetation to reduce runoff erosion. In front of the lighthouse,

consideration may be given to armoring the slope with quarry stone. Along the

shore east of the existing revetment, an extension of this revetment could be

constructed and the bluff slope stabilized as indicated for the westerly section.

Mount Misery, village of Belle Terre. White Beach which fronts the high

eroding bluffs in this vicinity could be raised and widened by artificial

placement of beach fill to prevent wave attack at the toe of the bluff slope.

Slopes should be stabilized with vegetation which would be resistant to the

high winds sweeping the bluffs. Groin construction may be considered only if

losses of beach materials warrant such work.

Wading River Landing. The barrier bar beach could be raised and widened

by the artificial placement of beach fill to protect the residential development

from damages by wave attack and to reduce tidal inundation during extreme storms.

Existing groins may be raised and lengthened to hold the restored beach.

Luce Landing. The beach fronting the residential cottage development may

be restored by the artificial placement of beach fill, For additional protection

against wave attack, a revetment could be constructed on the embankment at the

back of the beach. If needed, groins may be constructed to hold the restored

beach.

Shore east of Goldsmith Inlet. Along 3,000 feet of shore east of Goldsmith

Inlet the eroded beach may be restored by artificial placement of sand fill. A

high jetty may be constructed on the east side of Goldsmith Inlet to prevent losses

of beach materials into the inlet. Also, the eroded dunes along the backshore

0 ~could be restored and planted with vegetation. Nourishment of the restored beach

should be conducted periodically.

Ken-neys Road and Horton Lane Beaches. Sections of these beaches which

are low and narrow could be raised and widened by artifical placement of

beach fill to help prevent damages to the shorefront and residential

development by wave attack and tidal inundation during extreme storms.

Nourishment of these beaches should be conducted periodically.

Horton Neck Point. The eroding bluff at Horton Neck Point may be

protected by construction of a riprap revetment high enough to dissipate

wave attack and runup. Such a structure would be similar to the one at

Old Field Point. The bluff slope above the revetment could be either

reshaped with a gentler grade and planted with vegetation indigenous to this

area, or covered with a blanket of stone to resist runoff erosion.

Hashamomuck Beach. The existing beach may be raised by the artifical

placement of beach fill to reduce damages to the shorefront development caused

by tidal inundation during extreme storms and hurricanes. The existing groin

at the east end of the beach could be reconstructed when the beach fill operation

is conducted. An alternative solution would be to construct a seawall or floodwall

along the seaward side of the shore highway. However, this plan would preclude

protection to developments lying outside of the seawall.

Truman Beach. The beach at this location may be raised and widened by the

artificial placement of beach fill to prevent a break occurring through the

northerly barrier bar with subsequent inundation of the shore highway extending

along the southerly barrier bar. If needed, terminal groins could be constructed

to hold the restored beach. The shore highway could be raised and its embankments

armored to insure its availability for vehicular use during emergency situations

under all conditions.

Orient Point. At Orient Point the low-lying farmlands which are subjected

to tidal inundation during hurricanes, could be protected by construction of a

seawall along both the Long Island Sound and Gardiners Bay shores of the point.

However, the cost of such protection might be prohibitive until there is further

development of this area.

Shore bluffs. In areas where the shore bluffs are being cut back by

erosion due to wave attack and surface runoff, the initial consideration for

0 ~protection should begiven to the toe of the bluff. The most desirable method

to provide this protection generally is by restoration of a protective beach

which is of sufficient width and height to prevent wave attack on the toe of

the bluff. If this method is not warranted in certain areas, then an alternative

solution would be the construction of protective shore works such as riprap mounds

and revetments, or bulkheads. The top elevations of these structures should be

sufficient to dissipate energy of breaking waves and to contain wave runup.

Once the toe of the bluff is protected, the bluff slope should be stabilized

and protected against erosion from rainfall runoff and wind.

A stone blanket may be placed on bluff slopes above protective shore

structures to reduce erosion from rainfall runoff. However, long slopes on

high bluffs will generally preclude use of this method. It is more desirable

to be able to shape the bluff slope, so that it lies on its natural angle of

repose. Construction of drainage ditches along the tope of the bluff to carry

rainfall runoff away from the bluff face will also serve to reduce such erosion.

Vegetation indigenous to the area, as well as other suitable species, should be

planted on the slope to prevent gullying by surface runoff and loss of bluff

materials by wind erosion.

Some considerations which should be followed in the planning of shore

protection works are: (1) groins should be designed to allow beach material to

bypass and nourish the downdrift shores, (2) construction of protective structures

in shore reaches should be as continuous and uniform as is possible; (3) where

shore structures such as bulkheads, seawalls arnd revetments protect only a

portion of a reach., the ends of the structures should return or tie into high

ground, so that flanking by waves will not occur; (4) periodic maintenance of

shore structures will greatly extend their useful life; (5) nourishment should

be provided periodically for beaches to insure protection of the upland shores;

and (6) the planning and design of shore protection should be accomplished by

qualified individuals or firms.

ATLANTIC OCEAN

To Come

Report

(TASK 7.2)

Flood Plain Management

and

Beach Erosion Along the Hudson River

Prepared by

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Office of Program Development, Planning and Research
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12233

The preparation of this report was financially aided through
a Federal Grant from the Office of Coastal Zone Management,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, under the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972.

This report was prepared under the Coastal Zone Management
Act of 1972 for the Division of State.Planning, Department
of State.

January, 1977

Grant Number: 04-5-158-50002

ti
4,
. N

- - ii 4 I'
I b/1

4*/ 4

I
44
*ii 21))z2cj.L/ .�6cL

j -
I - I V

*1 1' **

4
I CjP I

IC , i 4
4
A
Pc.S -A
/ -
A / 'Y &*-:' Qj9c.4 rC.321(XJ�,L 4; U

pis/ ,1Z-CL - Oc fr/e1o'
Djj .�i'&Z - 7 k

i-',p,s.i ..�,Y -oJ2 - /
iSf>e/ .�,A� - Ic'9.b 1- Cp4-i;G/) S

- D?�f.) �,f5- K (Pk4/) 4 1' ,

.'Q )); posI K
Qspci -4 - y-6 (,Pe.i4eU) <, 'r *$.44<,
'K �,L44- J7ci>j

-.4
j4

.444

o~~~~~~~~~~~~fin

Ai
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~t A "It[al1 yO

~2;D~t% t D

I~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ P.- /.I

7P',~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- I$3

* /&c~co' t&Cr~')/D'7( PI

DRAFT

INTRODUCTION

The Task 7.2 study on Flood Plain Management and Beach Erosion for Coastal

Zone Management has been divided into four areas: the Great Lakes, Hudson River,

North Shore of Long Island and South Shore of Long Island. Each area is thought

to have problems unique to itself. This report is the result of a study of the

tidal portion of the Hudson River.

STUDY AREA

The river was divided into six reaches with the boundaries for each reach

based on physiographic and waterway characteristics, the extent of riverfront

development, and in some instance on political boundaries.

Figure 1 indicates the division of the study area into the six reaches

established for study purposes. Numbering is from south to north originating

with Reach 1, which includes all of New York City and extends north to the

boundary between Bronx County and Westchester County. The easterly boundary

of Reach 1 is defined by the Bronx and Queens borders with Nassau County, and

on the south by a off-shore line.parallel to Brooklyn and Queens westward to the

mouth of Arthur Kill. The western boundary of the reach follows Arthur Kill and

Kill Van Kull northward and eastward along the New York-New Jersey border to

Upper New York Bay and continues north along the border to the Bronx County line.

Reach 2 extends north along the Hudson River from the Bronx-Westchester

boundary to a line approximately between Verplanck and Stony Point. The river

in this reach encompasses both the Tappan Zee and Haverstraw Bay and is con-

siderably wider than it is downstream and upstream.

At the north end of Haverstraw Bay, the River narrows to a width of k to

1/3 mile as it passes through the Hudson Highlands. Reach 3 extends through this

area from Peekskill to an upstream boundary approximately on a line between

Newburgh and Beacon. Reach 3 contains the deepest portion of the river which

in places exceeds 150 ,feet.

ST*U-O~11.c O.y'

VE~~~ ~L~-
I * - ,t

all~~~~~I

~~ [z~1~ ml ZR

PAN~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'d~t~rv

I ,0

sos~F

Where the Mid-Hudson south Reach 4 begins the river widens somwhat to

about -I mile and traverses more moderate, rolling topography up to the vicinity

of Kingston.

Reach 5 begins at Kingston. The river channel north of Kingston is narrower

and in some areas divided by shoals and islands. Reach 5 extends to the vicinity

of the Greene County-Columbia County line south of Castleton-on-Hudson at which

point upland urban development begins to become more intense.

Reach 6 extends from the Greene-Columbia County line north along the heavily

developed waterfront of the Capitol District and includes the Citi~es of Albany

and Watervliet on the west shore and Renssalaer and Troy on the east shore. The

northern boundary of the reach (and the study area) is the Troy Lock.

SCOPE OF STUDY

The purpose of this study is to locate and evaluate the flooding and beach

erosion problems within the coastal zone. After evaluation of the problems, the

use of coastal zone management practices will be considered as possible solutions

and recommendations will be made accordingly.

FLOODING

in general, flooding along the Hudson River is not a major problem. Individual

streams, which pass through the coastal zone have floods which may have large

damages, but the flood flows down the Hudson River itself do not inflict large

damages.

The Flood Insurance Map prepared by HUD can be used to delinate the flood

plain areas after the width of the coastal zone is defined. Reproduction of these

maps for this report is not considered practical.

EROSITON

The Soil Conservation Service in its Erosion and Sediment Inventory

of 1975 listed the amounts of sediment entering streams within New York

State. For the streams tributary to the Hudson River, a total of 325,731

tons of soil has eroded into the waterways; this is equivalent to approx-

imately 4,million cubic feet of soil. However, not all of the eroded soil

enters the coastal waters of the Hudson River.

In 1976, Bhi completed a study for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on

the uses of the Hudson River waterway. Two problems associated with erosion

were identified; these are sedimentation and floating debris. The maintenance

of the channels of the Hudson River is essential to future uses of the Hudson

River for commercial shipping as well as recreational boating. In addition

to eroding soils, debris enters the river from several sources including

deteriorating piers, wharves, bulkheads and abandoned barges. Also, natural

drift comprised of trees and other floatables from eroding banks enter the

waterway.

In 1971, the firm of Joseph S. Ward and Associates prepared a thorough

inventory of drift sources along the Hudson for the Corps of Engineers and

reported on the costs that would be incurred in the removal of drift sources.

A summary of conditions that were found for the entire River, the estimated

volumes for 1970, 1975 and 1980, and the costs for removal of drift is shown

in Table 1.

The Wlard study also provided estimates of the volume of debris sources

that would be contributed in future years. To give some indication of the

current status of the debris problem, data on the amounts that were estimated

for 1975 was excerpted from the study, totaled by reach and is shown in

Table 2.

TAB3LE ITI -4~6

SUD0Y A2'EA s �AY*
HUDSJ.N RiVFIR, INEWl YORK-DEXFT AND DEBERS ST'UDY
APAN1 ZE NDE TO TIROY L2CC<, NEW YORK

ESTiU'~ATED VOLUMES (CUBIC FEET) C C,', Di .7T C
(JULY 1 97 0 PR :CE S)
AMOUNT j~YE AR Y CON7RI 3UT i ON R E.McvA! R E PA I L

AM~u,4 T 1j7 0 1 7 5 1S0 I197 I 17 5 I1983 0C5

P I E RS 33 1 3 0OJ 1,3 50 1,0 50 2 9, 5 00 2 3 , 300 19,0 0 6 0, a000 1 2, 5 0

WHARVES ~~ ~~~~~15 6001 800 600 30,5001 2 900 230050 20,000!

SHORE .72 I I-
aULK.,iEAD2 ,0 0 I1,3 00 1,5 00 4 4 , 00 0 14 I, U 38, 000 11, 0 00 4 5, 0 00
STRUCTURES

MISCEILLANEOUS 2 0+ 7 501 1,1"0I60034000 5 3,00 0 75',000

FLOATABLE 2'4 3 00 7 00 3 3,350 235,000233,000 22 7,0 00 65 6, 00 0
A.BANDOED
NON-FLOATABLE 71 5, 05 a 6,1:5 0 7 , 050 l410, OC~385, 000 3 540Goo 6 15 ,0 00'
VESSELS ll_ _ _

PRESENTLY ~~~FLOATABLE 32 1 10 21 I0 9 20 1 8S5, 0 0083 , 00 017~oo CO 4 5 185, 000

I N USE II
INON-FLOATABLE 56 1,3 0 0 1, 5 00 12 , 600 280,00C-275 00r] 2 6LI000 S ,2,0 0 0 S v.60, 000

ERODING FANKS L ENG TH 93,0 00'I 1,40 0 1 ,6 5 ,70070, J 7 2 , 00 7 5,0 00 1 170,000 14O,000

DEBRIS ON SHORE 135100d,55,000180Is, GOO! 252, 00 0

PAW~~~~~~~~ I I

a.Estin-Lated amount of material contributed to the River from all sources in place on the year shcwn.
b.Estimated amount of debris material left in place on year shownm.

*Source: Report o-- the Hudson River Draft Study, Tappan Zee Bridge to Troy Lock, New York,
Joseph S. ',ard and Associates, Septemiber,'1971. j

TABLE III - 47

ESTIMATED DEi3RIS DRIFT CONTRIBUTED TO ':DSON RIVER
TAPPAN ZEE BRIDGE-TROY LOCK, 1975*

Source Amou-nL Annual Con ri urion
Number of Sources h\v Rach by Rcach (cubic feet) i by Roach (cubic fee-)
2 3 3 i 5:6 2 4
PIERS 12,000 2,420 7,5CC 950 890 60 320 70

c IP.ARVES 2 2 615 4,250: L6,500 3,520 4,600 410 200 55 140
7 9 13 33 10 4,600 1, 450; 5,550 16,900 4, 250 180 1 320 350 3S5 70
~~Bt~LEHEANE S 4 81,600 2, 00; 1 7 500 12, 78 a o I1,1

MISCELLEOS 3 4 8 2,SO 50 40

FLOATABLE i 2 3 11 7 1 20,0001 28,000 95,000 16,000 30,000 300 3001 1CO
AAtILDON ED
SC~~:I I0 I ,9 53 4
1I 102 45 5 14,000 18,600 124,500 150,300 23,300 170 600 3,595 1,530 240

I FLOATABLE .2 17 20,000 20,000 133,000 10 200

IIN USE INON o' '1450 O0 8,00I40 60 40
FLOATABLE 30 12! 14 , 500 4 450 660 450 1

TOTALS i60 i 54 175 102125 176,700, 157,320 433,550 194,500! 67,950; 1,740 2,060 6,22S5 2,430 1,675

ERODING BANKS(ft.) 1. 000; 17,700 59,500 14,800 1,250 21,700 45,800 6,950 5 460 1,1051 160

23,0001 52,150 63,300 f25,565 i 17,600 I
DF5RI S w; SHORE (Cu -f t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~I

*Source: Report of the Hudson River Drift Study, Tappan Zee Bridge to Troy Lock, New York,
Joseph S. Ward and Associates, 1971.

DRAFT
RCW: jp

DREDGING

The removal of sediments from the various channels of the Hudson River

is a recurring problem. The responsibility for dredging the main channels and

the mouths of certain tributaries to the River rests with the Corps of Engineers.

Maintenance of access channels is the responsibility of the industry or marina

which require the access.

There are approximately seventy-eight federally authorized channel projects

in New York Harbor (Reach 1), ranging from major channels for ocean-going vessels

(e.g. Amborse Channel, Bay Ridge Channel, etc.) at project depths measured 30 to

48 feet below mean low water, and maintained widths up to 2000 feet; to shallow

draft channels for recreational vessels and barges at project depths measured

from 4 to 15 feet below mean low water, with widths as narrow as 50 feet.

From New York City to Kingston (Reach 2 through 4) the main channel is

600 feet wide, then 400 feet wide to the Port of Albany (Reaches 5 and 6) with

a turning basin at Albany and anchorages near Hudson and Stuyvesant. All channel

depths are 32 feet in soft material and 34 feet in rock. Beyond Albany the channel

continues to the Troy Lock at depth of 14 feet and generally 400 feet wide.

Except for areas in Haverstraw Bay and the Tappan Zee most of the main

channel from New York to Kingston is naturally deep and is largely self-maintained,

hence little dredging is needed. Above Kingston, the river narrows and shoals

occur necessitating comparatively frequent dredging.

The Bhi report identified the major areas upstream from New York harbor

that require frequent dredging by the Corpsl These areas are shown on Figures

2, 3 and 4.

'-� ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~AREA TO BE D)REDGED
zl ~ '-37::.~ .-r -.-

0 _C'U 'O

u-. .. .
(7/,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~f

J~~~~~~~~~~~~~fJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ IS.R _8-

SEE it,,SCRT0. IitLF

P*LANES

* ~ ~~~~~~~~~~O -31ER Nlp~V OR

* ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~N W' DAUM PLN
~~~~~~~~~FC .R c,:.,,/U

A---.- ~~~~?V~~~ -~~ A LAB A IJ Y

PR. S /r Wl\ // j7/FAIC I&AS/A

- I 7!~~~'4F I;-F.L (NCFP IDF-.. t"!F. c;~~ F.S

b~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 7
EC" OL7 I 4ST
L~~~~~~~~~~~~E0 1F
) 5IU'VF TFF.T C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~A T. 7

P tFT D-KE

F~~~~~~~~~IFT

c-5~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PT

J-Cjf rT C.LPTH t 3 CSPT/ CSL ONOi UD N
_N2 FT- _ ~~~~JQ 0F PT 2/./] itS~C

LI~~~~~- -L~ Pt.OJECT DEPTFI

CY1 JJ ~~~~~~~~~~~~---* ~~~~~32 FT
N~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~L C>- L - 5 T-L~ --~.//.NY 5.TVRU%~AY h~jjCGE
F C L" *-,t CPT It.

I,,

ENS AREA TO BE DREDGEDS I

F~~/ jvJ AREAK C TO VEdAEREDGED

JA ruh~~~~~~ PI.ANES ~~~~~~SCALE OF FEET

J .L-W (NEtW YOR CFTY IL' t- t~ C-F 32 F-t'JECT) .7 b F I F LF 'W .t SL

L L W. (F/t I O ,F 3 2 I'FcT 1 0 IFO ICC I D0A 0 FT F-5tC K 6 ./ 0 It F'CM( 0:YPC t./3 Y
[ tOF-tAL F'C'C'-LE F'EL 4 CL Ctt (Ft 1 4 -3FCF FT tIo VE W' SL N.EW F .,.~Fs 1 tCV-K F' V

IAtS--CAA4 ~A

-1- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I HS-RE ISLJ

Y- E--o-
,tk ~ .' .0

I, -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PT N E 1 ALA RBROG
3~~~~~~~, ANY//R
T" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ if HUD(NRvFR E
so HUIAI OF 4'PR),IET NF YOR CITY T0WTE
T~~~~~~~~~~~~~rO

AL bl-CrE JUNE Th0'97OO
~~~~'T WL I f 2 iP WO -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ r-~~~~~5

DATUM~~~~~g,' F UA N.. ES..R~ 5SA~

I' ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L TV(~: `R ty~ FDO' LSF"'rTL T WMSL u5t~ Nt

Lt-W -A' 0 Or 32' '-)ECT T "'O 'CC at C~M) 0 t': L "V W S L-Z~(.SiLR E w C" ~q T

AD Q - k ~- 1 CI L I ~,Z M k!. ,AI 45L

DISPOSAL SITES

* ~~~Maintenance of the navigation channel results in the accumulation of

large quantities of sediments (dredged material) and floatable debris, which

must be placed somewhere. Portions of the coastal waters and the potential

coastal zone should be made available to dispose of this material.

At the present time, dredged material collected in the general area of

New York Harbor (Reach 1) is transported to the "mud" and "derrick stone"

disposal sites, located some nine miles southeast of the territorial base

line (a theoretical line between Sandy Hook, New Jersey, and Rockaway Point,

New York) and six miles off the New Jersey coast. Figure 5 shows the

location of this disposal site for sediments. The floatable debris is

collected by specially designed or equipped vessels. Debris for New York

harbor is transported to Caven Point, New Jersey, where it is incinerated

in a unique facility designed and built by the Corps for this purpose.

Figure 6 is an index map of all the disposal sites in Reaches 2 through

6. No disposal sites are located in Reach 2. Figure 7 shows the Kidds Point,

Can Hook, Gees Point and Storm King disposal sites located within the Hudson

River channel in Reach 3. All of the disposal sites in Reach 4 are located

within the Hudson River channel including the Danskammer Point and Crum Elbow

site shown in Figure 8 as well as the Dinsmore site shown in Figure 9.

All of the above sites were within the Hudson River channel and were

only suited for dredged material. The sites for Reaches 5 and 6 are located

along the river shoreline or on islands within the river. These sites are

shown on Figures 9 through 12. Both dredged materials and floatable debris

can be deposited on the sites.

The Bhi report identified the potential problem of environmental

conflicts with the uses for each of these sites. Dredging or the disposal

of dredged material may be affected by undesirable pollutants. Since a

complete environmental impact statement could not be made for each site

due to lack of data, a strong recommendation for their preservation could

not be made.

L 0 G S L A N D~ ~ ~~~1

01~~~~

G-)~~ON

-I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ DSOA I '(I' A

0 ~~~SAL *MLSP R7 T0 Tl RY

0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0 yoiLES< O

'\~~~~~~E FIGI.
s~~~' F E . IF

iS 2~iL

-- -SEE FIG.
SEE FIG. /

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I S $_
~~~~~~SEE FIG.,
D IS POSAL S VFF ~~~~~SE FI61

I i 1)E X ~fflF A . pS-
�721 sfE FIG.F

DEPARTI.'ENT OF THE /fullY (
NEW YORK'DISTTn1CT, CORPS OF ENCINEERS . -----
I V, YO0rK, NEW YORK ./

__SEFiG.

SEE~ F IG. I

SEE F IG.
7S 0

SEE FIG
7s -I I
SEEFI

~k~u~I. T~ - 7

STC.;.N! KJ~GIN/-.GrOUD~; -j

/, UWJN G R O U N D

'K-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ... ....

,,I~~~~~~~~~ / I'

S.\~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'~~~ CW -0 ' D

2>, ~ ~ it/f K 'sr C, T

N~~~~~~ ~,~

DIMPiN G'9 NID

C '. c - C \- 'C. I U R . -t

(~~~~~~~~~~~~~

CRU,'.'~~~~~~~~ EL/ .
jI,-'3i B \A D
C J11131 / ~ / - '3.3-3.3336

*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~DMRN G-NN D (7) P'N / G R"-','

3, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 5.,(~ C 7 A;--
/ C~~~di.~~ ELL3.4-W . .. '3/1.4 'JI.~~~~~~~~'6 - . 3/ lo E

(~~~~~

-- ~ ~ I 7 ` A GR

I Z'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\$~~~~~~~~'; / ''~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'~2

o~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I I //

I'-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~RPS / /\ /1 N" OZs -C
1~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~ISOA /M 0 C.' P .O

(~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CL CL..,,'; I

i~~~~~~~ULN DISPSA L C 7
2~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A /7-5,/P

.~~~~~ I 12..

42'~~~~~- 20'~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ N,

P k rC ,[ U P L O I P - , SIT

r-;~~~~~~~~~~~4

ND~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \ /-.',.

PROPOSE'D ~ UPLA

I.,~~~~~~~FI',. Is- C IIIT "

YohQ// N

(~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C ',k

A'Q~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

y~~~ (X'K~~~~~~~'~~~' 'p1~~~~l

I.' I .-', I~~~~~4225

-4- / /

/7-5~~~~~~~~~~~1-

42 / \ ~~~/ *~~:__-i 42~~~25 ~~> ,. ., (. ' (il

PRPOE UPAD11;:-DULN

\\~~~~~~~~z /IA, -0-

F.I G URE N '' ''V

/ '-N'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

*1 (~~~~I s ... ....... . .~
if -.--.---I 'Her C --*

A~~~~~~~~~~N r-

PROPOSED K ~~)/// \' I \L~~C~tPCOPOSEED>TE 1-
EASJ\~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1!4N //-A DvISPSA S IT
A~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' 'N '
D/ PA BASIIN.-'
FJW /17- F C ,ill

V~~~~~~~~~~ '

DRAFT

SUJMMARY

The Hudson River from the Atlantic Ocean to the Federal Dam is a tidal

estuary. Flood flows through the estuary are not a major problem. Some

*flooding problems may occur in the potential'coastal zone near the mouths

of certain tributaries. These areas can be identified from the HUD Flood

Insurance Maps if needed.

The erosion along the shoreline results in two types of problems in

regards to navigation; these are floating debris and sedimentation.

Floating and partially submerged debris is a constant and sometimes

dangerous problem to commercial shipping and recreational boating on the

Hudson. Debris enters the River from several sources including deteriorating

piers, wharves and bulkheads, abandoned barges, - .Latural drift comprised

of trees and other floatables from eroding banks. One of the striking, negative

visual aspects of the Hudson River is the largenumber of old wooden barges,

abandoned in years gone by, rotting and breaking up on shores and creeks along

the River. Approximately 14,130 cubic feet of debris enters the waterway from

deteriorating vessels and shore structures.

Sedimentation from eroding soils along the shoreline and from various

tr~ibutaries cause problems with navigation. Figures from the Soil Conservation

Service in its Erosion and Soil Inventory of 1975 indicate that approximately

6 million cubic feet of soil entered the streams tributary to the Hudson River.

Not all of this sediment entered the navigation channel and not all the navigation

channel is subject to sedimentation.

In 1976, Bruce Howlett, Inc. prepared a report for the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers entitled "New York City and Hudson River Waterway Use Study." The

-report, which is the primary source of reference material for this study,

identified the reaches of the Hudson River that require frequent dredging plus

the location of potential disposal areas within the waterway or along its

shoreline. Figure 3 lists the above mentioned area.

Table 3

Dredging and Disposal Site Summary
CZM Flooding & Beach Erison Study (Task 7.4)

Reach Limit Description Dredging Area Stream Dumping Area Upland Dumping Site

Atlantic Ocean Sandy Hook-Rockaway Pk.
~~~~~~~1 ~New York Harbor Caven Point, N.J.
Bronx-Westch,,ster Co

2 Ossining
Haverstraw
Tappen Zee-Haverstraw
Bay

3 Kidds Point, Con Hook,
Gees Point, & Storm King
Newburgh & Beacon

4 Danskammer Poinit, Crum
Elbow and Dinsmore
Kingston

5 Nearly entire Reach Various sites along
shoreline
Green-Columbia Co line

6 Entire Reach Various sites along
shoreline
Federal dam

COASTAL ZONE CONSIDERATIONS

The Bhi report has identified areas which require frequent dredging as

well as areas which could be used for dumping materials from the debris clearing

and dredging operations. Although environmental impact statements have not

been made for each of these sites, these areas should be carefully considered

in the coastal zone management plan. The State's reliance upon a navigable

waterway for both commercial and recreational purposes depends upon suitable

disposal areas.

DRAFT

TECH-NICAL REPORT

ON THE IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION OF

SOILS SUITABLE FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELDS

IN THE

COASTAL ZONE M'NACEMENT AREA OF NEW YORK

The preparation of this report plus accompanying maps and
analyses was financially aided through a Federal Grant from
the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, under the Coastal Zone Management
Act pf 1972.

This report plus accompanying maps and analyses was prepared
under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 for the Division
of State Planning, Department of State.

Grant Number: 04-5-158-50002

NEW YORK STATE

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION

September 1976

INTRODUCTION

For any land use planning it is important to know how well suited the land

is for specific purposes. One such purpose is to identify, locate, and

evaluate the limitations of land for on-site sewage effluent disposal re-

lating to housing ~nd community development.

The most common on-site sewage effluent disposal system consists of.a septic

tank and leach field. The leach field is a subsurface tile system laid in

such a way that effluent from the septic tank is distributed reasonably uni-

formly into the natural soil.

Because the effluent is leached into the natural soil, soil characteristics

reflect the suitability of land for septic tank absorption fields. In

turn, the soil map is the key to locating the ar.a best suited for this pur-

pose.

CRITERIA

Criteria for rating soils (slight, moderate, and severe) for use as absorption

fields are based on the limitations of soils to absorb effluent. Factors in-

clude permeability of the subsoil and substratum, percolation rate, depth to

seasonal or permanent ground water level, depth to consolidated rockor other

impervious layers, flooding, slope, and amount of stoniness or rockiness. Table

I details the specific criteria for each factor.

1. Soils with moderate to very rapid permeability are rated as having

slight limitations. Those soils having a permeability at the slower

end of the moderate range (hydraulic conductivity rate about 1.0 to

0.6 inches per hour) are rated as having moderate limitations. Moder-

ately sla. and slowly permeable soils are rated a3 having severe limi-

tations.

-2-

Very coarse textured soil materials have rapid permeability but are rel-

atively poor filtering materials. Although such soils have slight limi-

tations for absorption fie-lds, they permit unfiltered effluent to travel

long distances. Unfiltered effluent may create a contamination hazard

if water supplies, streams, ponds, or lakes are nearby and receive seep-

age from the absorption field.

2. Soils having percolation rates faster than 45 minutes per inch

function satisfactorily. Those between 45 and 60 minutes per inch

have moderate limitations and those slower than 60 minutes per inch

have severe limitations.

Because the methods of measuring percolation and permeability are differ.

ent, correlation between the two values is imperfect.

3. A seasonal water table should be at least 4 feet below the bottom of

the trench at all times for soils rated as having slight limitations.

Soils with a water table less than 2 feet below the bottom of the

trench for extended periods have a severe limitation.

4. Floodwaters interfere with the functioning of the filter field and

carry away unfiltered sewage. Areas that are rarely flooded have

moderate limitations. Soil areas that are commonly flooded have

severe limitations. Soils that are subject to flooding have severe

limitations even if the permeability is satisfactory and the ground-

water level is below 4 feet.

5. Soils on slopes less than 8 percent are the best sites for sewage

disposal systems from the standpoints of construction and successful

operation of an absorption field. Mechanicalproblems of layout and

construction, however, increase with steepness of slope. Slopes bet-,

-3-

ween 8 and 15 percent slopes have moderate limitations. Those greater

than 15 percent have severe limitations.

Lateral seepage or down-slope flow is a problem on sloping soils, espe-

cially where impermeable materials occur within the 4-foot depth.

6. Impervious layers, including rock formations, should be 4 feet or more

below the bottom of the tile french bottoms. Impervious layers more

than 72 inches deep are rated as slight: limitations, Those between

48 and 72 inches are moderate, while those less than 48 inches are

severe.

7. Soils having no stones or stones 30' tc 100' apart (classes as stony)

have slight limitations and extremely .tony soils (less than 5' apart)

have severe limitations.

Problems with layout and construction increase with the stoniness of the

soil. In addition, large rocks, boulders, and rock outcrops increase

construction costs.

8. Areas having no bedrock have slight limitations. Those having bed-

rock exposed on about 10% of the area have moderate limitations, and

exposures covering more than 10% of the area are severely limited.

Creviced or fractured rock, such as limestone, may allow unfiltered sewage

to become a contamination hazard to aquifers, streams or lakes.

PROCEDURES

An initial review of soils maps indicates that soils suitable for septic tank

absorption fields are not very extensive in the Coastal Zone Management study

area. For this reason, the procedure for locating the suitable areas has been

simplified.

Table I Soil limitation ratings for septic tank absorption fields

Degree of soil limitation
Items affecting use

Slight Moderate Severe

Permeability class_/ Rapid/ Lower end of Moderately
moderately rapid moderate slow and slow
and upper end of
moderate

Percolation rate Fast r than 45 min/ 45-60 min./in. Slower than 60 min/in
(Auger hole method)

Depth to water table More than 72 in. 48-72 in. Less than 48 in.

Flooding None Rare Occasional or
frequent

Slope 0-8% 8-15% More than 15%
3
Depth to hard rock, / More than 72 in. 48-72 in. Less than 48 in.
bedrock, or other
impervious materials

Stoniners class None or stony Very stony Extremely stony

Rockiness class No bedrock Bedrock ex- Bedrock exposed
posed about more than i0% of
10% of area area.

The limitation ratings are related to the permeability of soil layers at and
below depth of the tile line (2 feet).

/ There may be a pollution'hazard to water supplies.
3
J Based on a 2-foot depth of the tile.

-5-

1. Soil mapping units, soil types, or soil associations which meet the

criteria for septic tank absorption fields have been identified for

each county. The lists are presented in the Appendix.

Because areas of suitable soils are not extensive, it was decided that

most countieE would not warrant detailed delineations on overlays of 7�

minute topographic quadrangles. For most counties

2a. Soil survey maps will be reviewed and suitable areas will be descri-

bed as tc their location within a township and in relation to prox-

imity to cities, villages, roads, streams or other identifiable

cultural and physical features. An estimate will be made of the

approximate acreage in each area.

Counties or.parts of counties having sizable areas of suitable soils

2b. Will be delineated on overlays of 7� minute topographic quadrangles.

INFORMATION SOURCES

Delineations and criteria for septic tank absorption fields were adapted from

the publication, Guide for Interpreting Engineering Uses of Soils, U.S.D.A.

�.il Conservation Service, Issued November 1971.

Soil maps and legends were procured from the National Cooperative Soil Survey

program conducted by the Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with the

qornell University Agricultural Experiment Station.

Soil Survey Report - Albany and Schenectady Counties, Issued Nay 1942.

Albany County General Soil Associations, Technical Report 200-1, Capital

District Regional Planning Commission.

Cayuga County Soil Survey, Issued May 1971.

Chautauqua County Soil Survey (in progress).

-6-

Soil Survey of Columbia County, Issued 1929.

Dutchess County Soil Survey, Issued December 1955.

Erie County Soil Survey (in progress).

Greene County General Soil Map and Interpretations, Temporary State

Commission to Study the Catskills.

Jefferson County Soil Survey (in progress).

Monroe County Soil Survey, Issued March 1973.

Niagara County Soil Survey, Issued October 1972.

Orange County Soil Survey (manuscript).

Orleans County Soil Survey (manuscript).

Oswego County Soil Survey (manuscript).

Putnam, Rockland and Westchester Counties Soil Survey (manuscript)

Rensselaer County Soil Survey (in progress).

General Soil Map, St. Lawrence County, New York,

U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service in Cooperation with the Cornell

University Agricultural Experiment Station.

Suffolk County Soil Survey, Issued April 1975

Ulster County Soil Survey (manuscript)

Wayne County Soil Survey (manuscript)

RECOMMENDATIONS

(To be developed after the septic tank absorption field data has

been analyzed and evaluated.)

APPENDIX

County Listings of

Limitations fdr Septic Tank Absorption Fields

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Albany County, New York

Soil Types

Colonie loamy fine sand
Copake fine sandy loam
Hoosic coarse sandy loam

Limitations ratings would be: Slight for 0 to 8 percent slopes and Moderate
for 8 to 15 percent slopes

Source: Soil Survey Report-Albany and Schenectady Counties
Issued May 1942.

Correlated with Albany County General Soil Associations. Technical Report
200-1, Capital District Regional Planning Commission.

Colonie-Elnora Association, rolling

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Cayuga County, New York

Mapping Units Limitations

Plton cobbly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Alton gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Alton gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Arkport fine sandy loam, I to 6 percent slopes Slight
Arkport fine sandy loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Moderate
Colonie fine sandy loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes Slight
Colonie loamy fine sand, 1 to 6 percent slopes Slight
Colonie loamy fine sand, 6 to 12 percent slopes Moderate
Howard gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Howard gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Palmyra gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Palmyra gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Palmyra gravelly sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Palmyra gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Wampsville gravelly silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight

Source: Cayuga County Soil Survey,
Issued May 1971.

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Chautauqua County, New York

Mapping Units Limitations

Allard silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Allard silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Arkport fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Chenango gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Chenango gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Colonie loamy fine sand, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Colonie loamy fine sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Mardin-Chenango gravelly silt loam, 0 to 8 percent
slopes Moderate
Mardin-Chenango gravelly silt loam, 8 to 15 percent
slopes Moderate

Source: Chautauqua County Soil Survey (in progress).

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Columbia County, New York

Soil Types

Hoosic coarse sandy loam
Hoosic fine sandy loam
Hoosic gravelly fine sandy loam
Hoosic gravelly loam
Hoosic loam
Otisville gravelly loam
Pittsfield gravelly loam
Pittsfield stony loam

Limitations ratings would be: Slight for 0 to 8 percent slopes and
Moderate for 8 to 15 percent slopes.

Source: Soil Survey of Columbia County,
Issued 1921.

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Dutchess County, New York

Mapping Units Limitations

Colonie fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Colonie fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Colonie loamy fine sand, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Colonie loamy fine sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Copake fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Copake fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Copake gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Copake gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Gloucester gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Gloucester gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Gloucester stony loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Gloucester stony loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Hoosic fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Hoosic fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Hoosic gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Hoosic gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Hoosic gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Hoosic gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Hoosic loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Hoosic loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Merrimac gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent Slight
slopes
Merrimac gravelly fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent
slopes Moderate
Merrimac gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent Slight
slopes
Merrimac gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent Moderate
slopes
Merrimac gravelly silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Merrimac gravelly silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Palmyra gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Palmyra gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Pittsfield gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Pittsfield gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Pittsfield stony loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Pittsfield stony loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Stockbridge gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Stockbridge gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Stockbridge stony loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Stockbridge stony loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate

Sources: Dutchess County Soil Survey,
Issued December 1955.

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Erie County, New York

Mapping Units Limitations

Allard silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Allard silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
4 E~Alton finely gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
~, ~~ jAlton finely gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Alton gravelly loam, silty substratum, 0 to 8 percent
slopes Slight
Alton gravelly loam, silty substratum, 8 to 15 percent
~;~ ~ : �slopes Moderate
l l t , Arkport very fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight
a -,-l ~Arkport very fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
E iBlasdell shaly silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Blasdell shaly silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Chenango channery silt loam, fan, 0 to 8 percent
P~I~ ~ slopes Slight
Chenango cobbly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Chenango cobbly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
"5 ~ Chenango gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
X ! ~~Colonie loamy fine sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Colonie loamy fine sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
i ~ ~~Palmyra gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Palmyra gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Valois gravelly silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Valois gravelly silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate

Source: Erie County Soil Survey (in progress).

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Greene County, New York

Soil Associationsl/ Limitations /

Barbour-Tunkhannock Association, nearly level Slight
Chenango Association, nearly level Slight
Colonie Association, rolling Moderate
Stockbridge-Farmington-Rock Outcrop Association,
rolling Moderate
Tunkhannock Association, gently sloping Slight
Tunkhannock-Suncook-Barbour Association, nearly level Slight

Source: Greene County General Soil Map and
Interpretations, Temporary State Commission
to Study the Catskills.

/ The underlined members of the soil associations are considered to be the
soils suited for septic tank absorption fields.

2 Ratings are given for the dominant slope phase.
_/ Ratings are given for the dominant slope phase.

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Jefferson County, New York

Mapping Units Limitations

Agawam fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Alton gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Arkport fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Arkport fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Bonaparte gravelly loamy fine sand, 0 to 8 percent
slopes Slight
Bonaparte gravelly loamy fine sand, 8 to 15 percent
slopes Moderate
Charlton gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent
slopes Slight
Charlton gravelly fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent
slopes Moderate
Charlton very stony soils, sloping Moderate
Herkimer shaly silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Herkimer shaly silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Hinckley gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Kars gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Kars gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Windsor loamy fine sand, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Windsor sand, gently sloping Slight

Source: Jefferson County Soil Survey (in progress).

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION 'FIELD

Monroe County, New York

Mapping Units .s Limitations

Alton gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Alton gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Arkport very fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes Slight
Arkport very fine sandy loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Moderate
Arkport-Dunkirk very fine sandy loams, 2 to 12
percent slopes Moderate
Colonie loamy fine sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes Slight
Colonie loamy fine sandy, 6 to 12 percent slopes Moderate
Palmyra gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent
slopes Slight
Palmyra gravelly fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent
slopes Moderate
Palmyra gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Wampsville cobbly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Wampsville cobbly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate

Source: Monroe County Soil Survey,
Issued March 1973.

I . i.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' i

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Niagara County, New York

Mapping Units Limitations

trkport fine sandy loam, gravelly substratum,
0 to 6 percent slopes Slight
Arkport very fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes Slight
Arkport very fine sandy loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Moderate
Colonie loamy fine sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes Slight
Howard gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Howard gravelly loam,,8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Otisville gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight

Source: Niagara County Soil Survey,
Issued October 1972.

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Orange County, New York
Z'3

Mapping Units Limitations

Allard silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Charlton fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Charlton fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Chenango gravelly silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Chenango gravelly silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Hoosic gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Hoosic gravelly sandyjloam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Oakville loamy fine sand, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Otisville gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Otisville gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Pittsfield gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Pittsfield gravelly loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Riverhead sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Riverhead sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Unadilla silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Unadilla silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate

Source: Orange County Soil Survey (manuscript).

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Orleans County, New York

Mapping Units Limitations

Alton gravelly sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Arkport very fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes Slight
Arkport very fine sandy loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Moderate
Colonie loamy fine sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes Slight
Colonie loamy fine sand, 6 to 12 percent slopes Moderate
Howard gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Wampsville gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight
n
Source: Orleans County Soil Survey (Manuscript).

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Oswego County, New York

Mapping Units Limitations

Pdams-Windsor complex, rolling Moderate
Alton cobbly silt loam, rolling Moderate
Alton gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Alton gravelly fine sandy loam, rolling Moderate
Alton gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Colton-Hinckley complex, rolling Moderate
Herkimer shaly silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Herkimer shaly silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Hinckley gravelly loamy sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Hinckley gravelly loamy sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Otisville loamy fine sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes Slight

Source: Oswego County Soil Survey (manuscript).

LIMITATIONS FOR SPETIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Putnam, Rockland and Westchester Counties, New York

Mapping Units Limitations

bgawam fine-sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Agawam fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Charlton fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Charlton fine sandy loam, 8 to 15'percent slopes Moderate
Cheshire gravelly sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Cheshire gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Haven loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Hinckley gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Hinckley gravelly loamy sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Merrimac fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Merrimac fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Stockbridge gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent
slopes Slight
Stockbridge gravelly fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent
slopes Moderate

Source: Putnam, Rockland and Westchester Counties
Soil Survey (manuscript).

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Rensselaer County, New York

Mapping Units Limitations

Chenango gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Chenango gravelly loam, fan, 3 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Hartland silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Hartland silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Haven silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Hoosic gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Hoosic gravelly loam, rolling Moderate
Oakville variant loamy fine sand 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Oakville variant loamy fine sand, 8 to 15 percent
slopes Moderate
Otisville gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Riverhead fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Riverhead fine sandy loam, rolling Moderate

Source: Rensselaer County Soil Survey (in progress).

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

St. Lawrence County, New York

Soil Associations 1/ Limitations 2/

Adams Association, gently sloping Slight
Adams - Croghan Association, nearly level Slight
Allagash Association Slight
Charlton - Sutton Association, stony, gently sloping Slight
Charlton - Sutton Association, very stony, gently sloping Moderate
Colton Association, gently sloping Slight
Colton Adams Association, sloping Moderate
Croghan -Adams Association, nearly level Slight
Kars Association, gently sloping Slight
Pittsfield - Georgia Association, stony, gently sloping Slight
Pittsfield - Georgia.Association, very stony, gently sloping/Moderate
Trout River - Fahey Association, gently sloping Slight

Source: General Soil Map, St. Lawrence County, New York, U.S.D.A.,
Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Cornell Univer-
sity Agricultural Experiment Station.

1/ The underlined members of the soil associations are considered to be
the soils suited for septic tank absorption fields.

2/ Ratings are given for the dominant slope phase.

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Suffolk County, New York

Mapping Units Limitations

Bridgehampton silt loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes Slight
Bridgehampton silt loam, graded Slight
Carver and Plymouth sands, 0 to 3 percent slopes Slight
Carver and Plymouth sands, 3 to 15 percent slopes Slight to Moderate
Haven loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes Slight
Haven loam, 6 to 12 percent sloeps Moderate
Plymouth loamy sand, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Plymouth loamy sand, B to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Plymouth loamy sand, stlty substratum, 0 to 9 percent slopes/Slight
Riverhead sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Riverhead sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Riverhead very stony sandy loam, 3 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Riverhead and Haven soils, graded, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Riverhead and Haven soils, graded, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate

Source: Suffolk County Soil Survey, Issued April 1975.

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK ABSORPTION FIELD

Ulster County, New York

Mappin Units Limitations

Chenango gravelly silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Chenango gravelly silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Hoosic cobbly loam, O to 3 percent slopes Slight
Hoosic gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Hoosic gravelly loam, rolling Moderate
Plainfield loamy sand., O to 8 percent slopes Slight
Plainfield loanmy satrd, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Riverhead fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Riverhead fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Tunkhannock gravelly loam, O to 8 percetn slopes Slight
Tunkhannock gravelly loam, rolling Moderate
Unadilla silt loam Slight

Source: Ulster County Soil Survey (manuscript).

LIMITATIONS FOR SEPTIC TANK.ABSORPTION FIELD

Wayne County, New York

Mapping Units Limitations

Alton cobbly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Alton gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Alton gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate
Colonie loamy very fine sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes Slight
Colonie loamy very fine sand, 6 to 12 percent slopes Moderate
Oakville loamy fine sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes Slight
Palmyra cobbly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Palmyra gravelly loam. 0 to 8 percent slopes Slight
Palmyra gravelly loam,'8 to 15 percent slopes Moderate

Source: Wayne County Soil Survey (manuscript).

TECHNICAL REPORT

ON THE

LOCATION OF SLOPES GREATER THAN 15 PERCENT

IN THE

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AREA IN NEW YORK

The preparation of this report. plus accompanying maps and
analyses was financially aided through a Federal Grant from
the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, under the Coastal Zone Management
Act of 1972.

This report plus accompanying maps and analyses was prepared
under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 for the Division
of State Planning, Department of State.

Grant Number: 04-5-158-50002

NEW YORK STATE

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION

September 1976

I NTRODUC TI ON

The gradient of a landscape is aqp important factor in the use of land. In

general, it becomes a limiting factor for most land uses and management where

slopes are greater than 15 percent.

For example, slopes greater than 15 percent have a limiting effect on the

intensity of agriculture and the management of land for agricultural uses,

* Similarly, steep slopes affect housing and community development, and road,

highway and public works projects. Effects are through the need for more

stringent specifications, complicated designs, and special construction

techniques, all increase costs. These increased costs frequently become

prohibitive for the local community.

CRI TERIA

1. The dominant slope is greater than 15 percent.

PROCEDURES

Within the Coastal Zone Management area in New York, steep slopes are more

common in the Hudson Valley. Here,

1. Delineations will be made on overlays using the contour interval-

linear distance relationship on 7-, minute topographic quadrangles.

In the other sections of the CZM study area, these steep slopes are small and

infrequent. Delineations on 7�- minute overlays would be unwarranted. In these

areas

la, A brief narrative will describe the steep slope areas in each county

as noted from 7�2 minute quadrangles and from appropriate mapping units

* ~~~~shown on the soils maps.

DRAFT

TECHNICAL REPORT

ON THE IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION OF

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

This report plus accompanying maps and analyses was prepared
under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 for the Division
of State Planning, Department of State

Grant Number: 04-5-158-50002

NEW YORK STATE

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION

September 1976

INTRODUCTION

Earth products, such as sand and~ gravel, are valuable natural resources. There

is a tremendous demand for these resources as materials for construction and

engineering purposes including manufacturing of concrete, sub-base for highways,

backfill for leach fields, and fill on construction and development projects.

The intent of this report is to identify and locate the probable sources of sand

and/or gravel in the Coastal Zone Management study area. Such an inventory can

be evaluated as to how well these sources will meet the future needs of com-

munities within the Coastal Zone.

CRI TERI A

Soil series are identified on the probability that these soils generally contain

sizable quantities of sand and/or gravel.

1. Probable sources must have sand and/or gravel deposits at least 3 feet

thick.

Most of the identified soils typically have sand and/or gravel parent materials

within 6 feet. However, some soils may have little or no sand or gravel in the

upper 5 or 6 feet. Yet, from observations made in deep cuts or from knowledge

of local geology, that the identified soils are underlain by sand or gravel is

known.

Although, beaches, dunes, and streambeds are potential sources of sand and gravel,

these areas will not be identified because of their environmental sensitivity.

All areas containing granular material may not be economically feasible for ex-

* ~traction. Neither the quantity nor the quality of the sand and/or gravel source

is assured for the areas identified.

-2 -

O ~PROCEDURES

1. Soil types or soil associations which are likely to have deposits

of sand and/or gravel at least 3 feet thick have been listed for

each county. County lists are in the Appendix.

A preliminary review of soils maps indicates that sand and/or gravel deposits

within the Coastal Zone Management study area are small and scattered. There-

fore, the procedure for locating these areas in most counties would not

warrant detailed delineations on 7�1 minute topographic quadrangle overlays.

2a. Soil maps will be reviewed and send and/or gravel deposits will be

deposited as to their location within a township and in relation

to proximity to cities, villages, roads, streams or other identi-

fiable cultural and physical features. An estimate will be made

of the approximate acreage in each area.

Counties or parts of counties having sizable areas.

2b. Will be delineated on overlays of 7�2 minute topographic quadrangles.

INFORMATION SOURCES

Criteria for sand and/or gravel sources were adapted from the Guide for interpret-

ing Engineering Uses of Soils, U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Issued November

1971.

Soil maps and legends were procured from the National Cooperative Soil Survey

Program conducted by the Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with the

Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station.

Soil Survey Report - Albany and Schenectady Counties, Issued May 1942.

Albany County General Soil Associations, Technical Report 200-1, Capital

District Regional. Planning Cormission.

-3-

Cayuga County Soil Survey, Issued May 1971.

Chautauqua County Soil Surve5 (in progress).

Soil Survey of Columbia County, Issued 1929.

Dutchess County Soil Survey, Issued December 1955.

Erie County Soil Survey (in progress).

Greene Co unty General Soil Map and Interpretations, Temporary State

Commission to Study the Catskills.

Jefferson County Soil Survey (in progress).

Monroe County Soil Survey, Issued March 1973.

Niagara County Soil Survey, Issued October 1972.

Orange County Soil Survey (manuscript).

Orleans County Soil Survey (manuscript).

Oswego County Soil Survey (manuscript).

Putnam, Rockland and Westchester Counties Soil Survey (manuscript).

Rensselaer County Soil Survey (in progress).

GCeneral Soil Map, St. Lawrence County, New York, U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation

Service in cooperation with the Cornell University Agricultural Experi-

ment Station.

Suffolk County Soil Survey, Issued April 1975.

Ulster County Soil Survey (manuscript).

Wayne County Soil Survey (manuscript).

EVALUATION

(To be made after the probable sources of sand and/or gravel have been

located.)

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Albany County, New York

Soil Type

Claverack fine sandy loam, deep phase
Colonie loamy fine sand
Copake fine sandy loam
Granby loamy fine sand
Hoosic coarse sandy loam

Source: Soil Survey of Albany and Schenectady Counties,
Issued May 1972.

Correlated with Albany County General Soil Associations, Technical
Report 200-1, Capital District Regional Planning Commission.

Colonie-Elnoria Association, rolling
Elnora-Elmwood Association, nearly level

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Cayuga County, New York

Soil Type

Alton cobbly loam
Alton gravelly sandy loam
Alton and Howard soils
Arkport fine sandy loam
Colonie fine sandy loam
Colonie loamy fine sand
Colonie and Arkport soils
Fredon loam
Galen fine sandy loam'
Howard gravelly loam
Langford-Howard gravelly loam
Minoa fine sandy loam
Palmyra gravelly loam
Palmyra gravelly sandy loam
Palmyra soils
Palmyra, Howard and Alton soils
Phelps gravelly silt loam
Stafford fine sandy loam
Wampsville gravelly silt loam

Source: Cayuga County Soil Survey,
Issued May 1971

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Chautauqua County, New York

Soil Types

Allard silt loam
Arkport fine sandy loam
Braceville gravelly silt loam
Caneadea-Scio complex
Castile gravelly silt loam
Chenango gravelly silt loam
Colonie lo my fine sand
Fredon loam
Galen fine sandy loam
Mardin-Chenango gravelly silt loams
Mardin-Valois channery silt loams
Minoa fine sandy loam
Red Hook gravelly silt loam
Scio silt loam
Unadilla-Caneac:ea complex

Source: Chautauqua County Soil Survey (in progress).

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Columbia County, New York

Soil Types

Hoosic coarse sandy loam
Hoosic fine sandy loam
Hoosic fine sandy loam, steep phase
Hoosic gravelly fine sandy loam
Hoosic gravelly loam
Hoosic loam
Otisville gravelly loam

Source: Soil Su:rvey of' Columbia County,
Issued '929.

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Dutchess County, New York

Soil Types

Atherton silt loam
Braceville gravelly loam
Bracoville silt loam
Colonie fine sandy loam
Colonie loamy fine sand
Copake fine sandy loam
Copake gravelly loam
Homer gravelly silt -loam
Hoosic fine sandy loam
Qoosic gravelly loam
Hoosic gravelly sandy loam
Hoosic loam
Melrose fine sandy loam
Merrimac gravelly fine sandy loam
Morrimac gravelly sandy loam
Merrimac gravelly silt loam
Palmyra gravelly loam
Red hlook silt loam

Source: Duteloss County Soil Survey,
Issued December 1955.

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Erie County, New York

Soil Types

Allard silt loam
Alton finely gravelly sandy loam
Alton gravelly loam
Arkport very fine sandy loam
Blasdell shaly silt loam
Castile cobbly loam
Castile gravelly loam
Chenango channery silt loam, fan
Chenango cobbly loam,
Chenango gravelly loam
Chenango and Palmyra soils
Colonie loamy fine sand
Elnora loamy fine sand
Farnham shaly silt loam
Farnham shaly silt loam, fan
Galen very fine sandy loam
Halsey silt loam
Junius loamy fine sand
Minoa very fine sandy loam
Palmyra gravelly loam
Phelps finely gravelly loam
Phelps gravelly loam
Red Hook silt loam
Scio silt loam
Valois gravelly silt loam

Source: Erie County Soil Survey (in progress).

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL 1/

Greene County, New York

Soil Associations

Barbour-Tunkhannock Association, nearly level
Chenango Assocation, moderately steep
Chenango Assoc.ation, nearly level
Colonie Association, rolling
Tunkhannock Association, gently sloping
Tunkhannock-Suncook-Barbour Association, nearly level

Source: Greene, County General Soil Map and Interpretations, Temporary
Commission to Study the Catskills

/ The underlined members of the soil associations are considered to be
the probable sources of sand and/or gravel.

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Jefferson County, New York

Soil Types

Agawam fine sandy loam
Altmar gravelly loam
Alton gravelly sandy loam
Arkport fine sandy loam
Bonaparte gravelly loamy fine sand
Deerfield loamy fine sand
Fredon gravelly loam
Galen fine sandy loam
Halsey mucky Icam
Herkimer shaly silt loam
Hinckley cobby soils
Hinckley gravelly loamy sand
Kars gravelly loam
Kars soils
Minoa fine sandy loam
Phelps gravelly loam
Scarboro mucky loamy fine sand
Wareham loamy fine sand
Windsor loamy fine sand
Windsor sand
Windsor soils

Source: Jefferson County Soil Survey (in progress).

0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Monroe County, New York

Soil Types

Alton gravelly loam
Alton gravelly sandy loam
Arkport very fine sandy loam
Arkport-Dunkirk very fine sandy loam
Arkport, Dunkirk and Colonie soils
Colonie loamy fine sand
Elnora loamy fine sand
Galen very fine sandy..loam
Halsey gravelly loam
Minoa very fine sandy loam
Ontario-Palmyra-Arkport complex
Palmyra gravelly fine sandy loam
Palmyra gravelly loam
Phelps gravelly fine sandy loam
Wampsville cobbLy loam

Source: Monroe County Soil Survey,
Issued March 1973.

- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~nw

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Niagara County, New York

Soil

Altmar loamy fine sand
Altmar gravelly fine sandy loam
Arkport very fine sandy loam
Arkport fine sandy loam, gravelly substratum
Colonie loamy fine sand
Elnora loamy fine sand
Fredon gravelly loam
Galen very fine sandy loam
Howard gravelly loam.-,
Otisville gravelly sandy loam
Phelps gravelly loam

Source: Niagara County Soil Survey,
Issued October 1972.

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Orange County, New York

Soil Types

Allard silt loam
Castile gravelly silt loam
Chenango gravelly silt loam
Fredon loam
Halsey silt loam
Hoosic gravelly sandy loam
Oakville loamy fine sand
Otisville gravelly sandy loam
Otisville and Hoosic soils
Riverhead sandy loam
Scarboro mucky sandy loam
Scio silt loam
Suncook sandy loam
Unadilla silt loam

Source: Orange County Soil Survey (manuscript).

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Orleans County, New York

Soil Types

Alton gravelly sandy loam
Arkport very fine sandy loam
Arkport-Collamer complex
Colonie loamy fine sand
Fredon loam
Galen very fine sandy loam
Howard gravelly loam
Howard soils
Janius loamy fine sand
Ph-lps gravelly fine'sandy loam
Wampsville gravelly loam

Source: Orleans County Soil Survey (manuscript).

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Oswego County, New York

Soil Types

Adams-Windsor complex
Alton cobbly silt loam
Alton gravelly fine sandy loam
Alton gravelly silt loam
Colton-Hinckley complex
Deerfield loamy fine sand
Fredon gravelly fine sandy loam
Granby loamy fine 'sand
Halsey gravelly loam
Herkimer shaly silt loam
Hinckley gravelly loamy sand
Minoa fine sandy loam, mod. well-drained variant
Minoa very fin. sandy loam
Naumburg loamy fine sand
Naumburg-Duane complex
Naumburg-Granby complex
Oakville loamy fine sand
Windsor loamy fine sand

Source: Oswego County Soil Survey (manuscript).

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Putnam, Rockland and Westchester Counties

Soil Types

Agawam fine sandy loam
Cheshire gravelly sandy loam
Fredon loam
Haven loam
Hinckley gravelly loam
Merrimac fine sandy loam

Source: Putnam, Rockland and Westchester Counties
Soil Survey. (Manuscript).

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Rensselaer County, New York

Soil Types

Castleton gravelly silt loam
Chenango gravelly loam
Chenango gravelly loam, fan
Fredon silt loam
Haven silt loam
Hoosic gravelly loam
Hoosic soils
Oakville soils
Oakville variEnt loamy fine sand
Otisville gravelly loamy sand
Riverhead fine sandy loam

Source: Rensselaer County Soil Survey (in progress).

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

St. Lawrence County, New York

Soil Associations 1/

Adams Association, gently sloping
Adams-Croghan Association, nearly level
Adams-Colton AssFociation, moderately steep
Allagash Association, gently sloping
Colton Association, gently sloping
Colton-Adams Association, sloping
Colton-Adams Association, very steep
Coveytown-Cook Association, nearly level
Croghan-Adams Association, nearly level
Kars Associatior, gently sloping
Naumburg-Scarboro Association, nearly level
Trout River-Fahey Association, gently sloping

Source: General Soil Map, St. Lawrence County, New York, U.S.D.A., Soil
Conservation Service in Cooperation with Cornell University
Agricultural Experiment Station

1 The underlined members of the soil associations are the probable
sources of sand and/or gravel.

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Suffolk County, New York

Soil Types

Atsion sand
Berryland mucky sand
Bridgehampton silt loam
Carver and Plymouth sands
Deerfield sand
Haven loam
Montauk fine sandy loam
Montauk loamy sand, sandy variant
Montauk silt loam
Plymouth gravelly loam sand
Plymouth loamy sand
Riverhead sandy loam
Riverhead very stony sandy loam
Riverhead and '?lymouth very bouldery soils
Scio silt loam, sandy substratum
Sudbury sandy loam
Walpole sandy loam
Wareham loamy sand

Source: Suffolk County Soil Survey,
Issuei October 1972.

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Ulster County, New York

Soil Types

Atherton silt loam
Castile gravelly silt loam
Chenango gravelly silt loam
Haven loam
Hoosic cobbly loam
Hoosic gravelly loam
Hoosic soils
Plainsfield loamy sand
Plainfield-Riverhead complex
Pompton fine sandy loam
Red Hook gravelly silt loam
Riverhead fine sandy loam
Scio silt loam
Suncook loamy fine sand
Tunkhannock gravelly loam
Unadilla silt loam
Walpole fine sandy loam

Source: Ulster County Soil Survey (manuscript).

PROBABLE SOURCES OF SAND AND/OR GRAVEL

Wayne County, New York

Soil Types

Alton cobbly loam
Alton gravelly sandy loam
Colonie loamy very fine sand
Colonie and Dundcirk soils
Elnora loamy fiae sand
Fredon loam
Halsey silt loam
Junius loamy very fin6 sand
Minoa very fine sandy loam
Oakville loamy fine sand
Palmyra cobbly loam
Palmyra gravelly loam
Palymra soils
Palmyra and Alton soils
Phelps cobbly loam
Phelps gravelly loam

Source: Wayne County Soil Survey (manuscript).

DRAFT

It~CHNICAL REPORT

ON THE

IDENTIFICATION AND I4APPING OF PRIME FARNLAND

IN THE

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AREA OF NEW YORK

The preparation of this report plus accompanying maps and
analyses was financially aided through a Federal grant from
the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, under the Coastal Zone Management
Act of 1972.

This report plus accompanying maps and analyses was prepared
under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 for the Division
of State Planning, Department of State,

Grant Number: 04-5-158-50002

NEW YORK STATE

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION

September 1976

INTRODUCTION

One of the tasks in the CoastaD Zone Management study area is the mapping of

natural critical areas. Interpretive soil maps are well-suited to showing

the extent of several natural critical areas, particularly prime farmland..

Prime farmland is defined as the land best-suited for producing food, feed,

forage, fiber, and oilseed cr6ps, and also available for these uses, (the

land could be cropland, pasture, forest or other land but not urban land or

water). It has tht, soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed

to produce sustained high yields of crops economically when treated and managed,

including water management, according to modern farming methods.

The purpose of delineating prime farmland is to provide an inventory of this

important natural r:esource in the Coastal Zone study area. This inventory is

intended to help decision-makers evaluate the implications of various options

in planning for various and oftentimes conflicting land uses. This report also

recommends various methods of retaining the best suited land for the production

of food, feed, forage and fibre crops in the Coastal Zone Management area of

New York.

CRITERIAI

The criteria for the identification of prime farmlands are entirely related

to soil characteristics and physical features. The physical criteria chosen

are stable criteria that accurately measure the soil's responsiveness to

modern management techniques.

1. Soils have adequate moisture within 40 inches (1 meter) or in the

root zone to produce the commonly grown crops in 7 or more years

out of 10.

-2-

2. At a depth of 20 inches (50 cm) the soils have a mean annual temper-

ature higher than 32 F~,(0 C). In addition, the mean summer tempera-

ture at this depth in soils with an organic (0) horizon is higher than

47 F (8 C).

3. The soils have a PH between 4.5 and 8.4 in all horizons within a

depth of 40 inches (1 meter) or in the root zone if the root zone is

less than 40 inches deep. This range of PH is favorable for growing

a wide variety of crops without adding large amounts of amendments.

4. The soil; have no water table or a water table that is maintained at

a sufficient depth during the cropping season to allow food, feed,

fiber, forage, oilseed crops common to the area to be grown.

5. The soils are not flooded frequently during the growing season (less

often than once in 2 years).

6. The soils have a product of K (erodibility factor) x percent slope

of less than 2.0. That is, prime farmland does not include soils

having a serious erosion hazard.

7. The soils have a permeability rate of at least 0.06 inches (0.15 cm)

per hour in the upper 20 inches (50 cm).

8. Less than 10 percent of the surface layer in these soils consist of

rock fragments coaser than 3 inches (7.6 cm). These soils present

no particular difficulty in cultivating with large equipment.

In general, the prime farmland definition embraces all lands in the Soil Con-

servation Service Land Capability Classes I, most of Class II, and Class III W.

Land in Classes II W and III W are included if an adequate water management

-3-

system maintains the water table at a depth to allow the growing of crops

common to the area.

PROCEDURES

A soil designated by a given name (series) varies somewhat from place to place

in the wide-spread coastal area of New York. Therefore, soil interpretations

were based on the typical soil properties of the soil series to a depth of

five or six feet. It should be noted that soil interpretations of the same

series may differ from county to county, particularly upon whether water

management systems in the county are properly installed and maintained (criteria

4) or whether less than 10 percent of the surface layer consisted of rock

fragments coarser than 3 inches (criteria 8).

Four levels of soils data were available. Most CZM counties had a modern medium-

intensity soil survey on 1:15840 (4" = I mile) scale aerial photographs. The

medium-intensity level is the standard for conducting a prime farmland inventory

at the national level. However, data was not available for all counties, there-

fore, the best available soils data was used, such as:

Albany - Old soil survey report (map included) and an up-dated general

soils map.

Columbia- Old soil survey report.

Dutchess - Old soil survey report. Availabe maps were at 4" = 1 mile.

Greene --Updated general soils map.

Jefferson - A modern medium-intensity soil survey for the whole CZM study

area is incomplete at this time. Also available was an old

soil survey report and soil association map.

-4-

St. Lawrence - Old soil survey report and an up-dated general soils

map.

The old soil survey and the up-dated generalized soils maps were at a 1:62500

scale (1" = 1 mile). The soil association map for Jefferson County was at a

scale of 1:13500 (1" = 2 miles).

The following procedures were used in the study:

1. A list of soil mapping units, soil types, or soil associations which

met the criteria for prime farmlands was compiled for each county.

Lists are given in the Appendix.

2. For Albary, Columbia, Dutchess and Greene Counties, a field reconnaissance

of.the potential prime farmland soil types and soil associations was

conducted with Soil Conservation Service soil scientists to see how

well the mapped areas met the criteria for prime farmlands. Based

upon the reconnaissance a final list of. soil types and soil associations

was developed for these counties.

3. Using the list of prime farmland mapping units, the boundaries of the

prime farmland soils delineated on the aerial photographs at the med-

ium-intensity level were sketched on overlays of 7- minute topographic

quadrangle (Scale 1:24000) sheets.

3a. From the list of soil types and soil associations and notes from the

field reconnaissance, prime farmlands were similarly sketched on 7�

minute overlays.

At the medium-intensity soil survey level, contrasting soils may comprise up

to 15 percent of a delineated area. However, where the old soil surveys and/or

generalized soils map levels, contrasting soils may make up 50 percent of the area.

INFORMATION SOURCES

Definitions and criteria for prime farmlands were obtained from the U.S.D.A.

Soil Conservation Service, Land Inventory and Monitoring Memorandum NY-1,

titled Prime and Unique Farmlands.

Soil maps and legends were procured from the National Cooperative Soil Survey

program conducted by the Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with the

Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Staticn.

Soil Survey Report - Albany and Schenectady Counties, Issued May 1942.

Albany County General Soil Associations, Technical Report 200-1,

Capital District Regional Planning CommLssion.

Cayuga County Soil Survey, Issued May 1971

Chautauqua County Soil Survey (in progress).

Soil Survey o' Columbia County, Issued 1929.

Dutchess County Soil Survey, Issued December 1955.

Erie County Soil Survey.(in progress).

Greene County General Soil Map and Interpretations, Temporary State

Commission to Study the Catskills.

Jefferson County Soil Survey (in progress).

Monroe County Soil Survey, Issued March 1973.

Niagara County Soil Survey, Issued October 1972.

Orange County Soil Survey (manuscript).

Orleans County Soil Survey (manuscript).

Oswego County Soil Survey (manuscript).

Putnam, Rockland and Westchester Counties Soil Survey (manuscript).

Rensselaer County Soil Survey (in progress).

General Soil Map, St. Lawrence County, New York, U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation

Service in cooperation with the Cornell University Agricultural Experi-

ment Station.

-6-

Suffolk County Soil Survey, Issued April 1975.,

Ulster County Soil Survey, (manuscript).

Wayne County Soil Survey (Thanuscript).

RECONI4ENDATIONS

(To be developed after the prime farmland data has been analyzed and

evaluated.

APPENDIX

County Listings of Prime Farmlands

PRIME FARM~LAND

Albany County, New York

Soil Types

Genesee fine sandy loam
Genesee silt loam
Hudson silty clay loam (heavy silt loam)

Source: Soil Survey Report-Albany and Schenectady Counties, Issued May 1942.

Correlated with the following soil associations from the Albany County General
Soil Associations, Technical Report 200-1, Capital District Regional Planning
Commission.

Rhinebeck-Madalin Association, nearly level
Hamlin-Wayland-Teel Association, nearly level

PRIME FARMLAND

Cayuga County, New York

Mapping Units

Alton gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Alton gravelly sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Arkport fine sandy loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes
Cazenovia silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Collamer silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Collamer silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Conesus gravelly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Conesus gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Dunkirk silt loam, l- to 6 percent slopes
Edward muck
Eel silt loam
Eel silt loam, high bottom
Fredon loam
Galen fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Galen fine sand1 loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Genesee gravelly loam, fan
Genesee silt loam
Genesee silt loam, high bottom
Hilton loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Hilton loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Honeoye silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Howard gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Howard gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Ira gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Ira gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Kendaia silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Landford-How�ard loams, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Lansing gravelly silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Lima silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Lima silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Minoa fine sandy loam
Muck, deep
Niagara fine sandy loam
Odessa silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Odessa silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Ontario fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Ontario loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Ovid silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Ovid silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Palmyra gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Palmyra gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Palmyra gravelly sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Phelps gravelly silt loam
Schoharie silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Sodus gravelly loam, 2 to 8 percent

PRIME FARMLAND

Cayuga County, New York(Continued)

Wampsville gravelly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Wampsville gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Warners loam, fan
Williamson silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Williamson silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes

Source: Cayuga County Soil Survey Report, Issued May 1971.

PRIME FARMLAND

Chautauqua County, New York

Mapping Units

Allard silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Allard silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Braceville gravelly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Braceville gravelly silt loam, 3 to 12 percent slopes
Canandaigua silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Canaseraga silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Canaseraga silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Carlisle muck
Chenango gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Chenango gravelly loam, 3 to 12 percent slopes
Collamer silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Danley gravelly silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes
Darien gravelly silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes
Darien silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Darien silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Galen fine sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Hamlin silt loam
Langford gravelly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Langford gravelly silt loam, 3 to 12 percent slopes
Mardin-Chenango gravelly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Mardin-Chenang) gravelly silt loam, 3 to 12 rercent slopes
Minoa fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Niagara silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Palms muck
Scio silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Teel silt loam
Williamson silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Williamson silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes

Source: Chautauqua County Soil Survey (in progress).

PRIME FARMILAND

Columbia County, New York

Soil Types

Cossayuna gravelly loam
Hoosic loam (R:.verhead)
Hotaling loam
Hudson silt loam (dominantly Rhinebeck)
Hudson silty clay loam (heavy silt loam)(dominantly Rhinebeck).
Ondawa loam
Ondawa silt loam
Pittsfield gravelly loam

Source: Soil Survey of Columbia County, Issued 1929.

PRIME FAPRMLAND

Dutchess County, New York

Soil Type

Amenia silt loam
Bernardston gravelly silt loam
Braceville gravelly loam
Braceville silt loam
Chagrin gravelly loam
Chagrin silt loam
Charlton gravelly loam
Copake fine sandy loam
Copake gravelly loam
Cossayuna fine sandy loam
Cossayuna gravelly loam
Dover fine sandy loam
Dutchess gravelly silt loam
Eel silt loam
Genesee fine sandy loam
Gloucester gravelly loam
Homer gravelly silt loam
Hudson fine sandy loam
Hudson silt lo.m
Ondawa gravelly loam
Palmyra gravelly loam
Pawlet loam
Pawlet silt loam
Pittsfield gravelly loam
Pittstown gravelly silt loam
Poultney loam
Poultney silt loam
Red Hook silt loam
Rhinebeck silt loam
Stockbridge gravelly loam
Sutton silt loam
Troy gravelly loam
Woodbridge gravelly loam

Source: Dutchess County Soul Survey, Issued December 1955.

PRIME FARULAND

Erie County, New York

Mapping Units

Allard silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Allard silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Alton finelygravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Alton finely gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Alton gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes, silty substratum
Appleton silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Appleton silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Arkport very fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Blasdell shaly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Blasdell shaly -ilt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Canaseraga silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Castile gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Castile gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Cayuga silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Cayuga silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Cazenovia silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Chenango gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Chenango gravell.y loam, 3 to 8 percent
Collamer silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Collamer silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Collamer silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes, till substratum
Danley silt loa.n, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Darien silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Darien silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Farnham shaly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Farmham shaly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Farnham shaly silt loam, fan, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Farnham shaly silt loam, fan, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Fremont silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Fremont silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Galen fine sandy loam, till substratum, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Galen very fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Galen very fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Hamlin silt loam
Honeoye loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Honeoye loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Hudson silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Kendaia silt loam
Lima loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Lima loan, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Marilla shaly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Marilla shaly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Minoa very fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Minoa very fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Mohawk shaly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Niagara silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Niagara silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Niagara silt loam, fan
Niagara silt loam, till substratum

PRINE FARMLAND

Erie County, New York(Continued)

Odessa silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Ovid silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Ovid silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Palmyra gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Palmyra gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Phelps finely gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Phelps finely gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Phelps gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slbpes
Phelps gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Raynham silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Raynham silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Rhinebeck gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slope:s
Rhinebeck silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Rhinebeck silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Rhinebeck variaat, silt loam
Schoharie silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Schoharie silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Scio silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Teel silt loam
Teel silt loam, gravelly substratum
Tioga silt loam
Valois gravelly silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Varysburg gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Varysburg gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Williamson silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Williamson silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes

Source: Erie County Soil Survey (in progress),

PRIIE FARLAND /

Greene County, New York

Soil Associations

Lordstown-Mardin Association, gently sloping
Odessa-Cayuga Association, gently sloping
Rhinebeck-Hudscn Association, gently sloping
Rhinebeck-Madalin Association, nearly level
Chenango Association,'\,nearly level
Tunkhannock Association, gently sloping
Tunkhannock-Suncook-Barbour Association, nearly level
Barbour-Basher Association, nearly level
Barbour-Tunkharnock Association, nearly level
Hamlin-Wayland-Teel Association, nearly level
Tioga-Middlebury-Wayland Association, nearly level

Source: Greene County General Soil Map and 'nterpretations, Temporary
State Commission to Study the Catskills.

1/ The underlined members of the soil associations are considered to
be the prime farmland soils.

PRIME FARMLAND

Jefferson County, New York

Mapping Units

Agawamn fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Agawam fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Altmar gravelly loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes
Alton gravelly sa.idy.laom, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Alton gravelly sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Amenia silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Amenia silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Arkport fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Arkport fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Bombay gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Bombay gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Camroden gravelly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Camroden gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Canandaigua silt Loam
Charlton gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Claverack loamy fine sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Claverack loamy fine sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Colamer silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Elmwood fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Elmwood fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Fredon gravelly loam
Galen fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Galen fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Hamlin silt loam
Herkimer shaly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Herkimer shaly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Hudson silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Ira gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Ira gravelly fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Kars gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Kars gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Lowville silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Lowvilld silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Madrid gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Madrid gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Massena gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Massena gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Minoa fine sandy loam
Munson silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Nellis silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes
Niagara silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Niagara silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Ondawa fine sandy loam
phelps gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Phelps gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Pinckney gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Podunk fine sandy loam

Jefferson County, New York (continued)

Rhinebeck silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Rhinebeck silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Sodus gravelly fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Swanton fine sandy loam
Teel silt loam
Varysburg gravelly snady loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes
Williamson very fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes

Source: Jefferscn County Soil Survey (in progress).

PRIME FARMLAND

Monroe County, New York

Mapping Units

Alton gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Appleton loam, 0 to 3 percent 'lopes
Arkport very fine sandy laom, '0 to 6 percent slopes
Cayuga silt loam, 0 to 2 percent'slopes
Cayuga silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Cazenovia gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Cazenovia gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Churchville silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Churchville silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Claverack loamy fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Claverack loamy fine sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Collamer silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Collamir silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Collamer silt loam, loamy subsoil variant, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Collamer silt loam, loamy subsoil variant, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Cosad loamy fine sand
Dunkirk silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Edwards muck
Eel silt loam
Galen very fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Galen very fine sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Genesee silt loam
Hamlin silt loam
Hilton fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Hilton fine sandy loaml, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Hilton loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Hilton loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Honeoye silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Honeoye silt loam, limestone substratum, 0 to 3 percetn slopes
Honeoye silt loam, limestone substratum, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Hudson silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Ira gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes
.Lima silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Lima silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Lima and Cazenovia silt loams, limestone substratum, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Madrid fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Madrid fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Massena fine sandy loam
Minoa very fine sandy loam
Muck, deep
Niagara silt loam, loamy subsoil variant
Odessa silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Odessa silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Ontario fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Ontario loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Ovid silt loam
Ovid and Appleton silt loams, limestone suhstratum

Monroe County, New York (continued)

Mapping Units

Palmyra gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Palmyra gravelly fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Palmyra gravelly loam, 3 to 8'percent slopes
Phelps gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Phelps gravelly fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Rhinebeck silt loam
Schoharie silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Schoharie silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Sodus gravelly fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes

Source: Monroe County Soil Survey. Issue March 1973.

PRIME FARMLAND

Niagara County, New York

Mapping Units

Altmar gravelly fine sandy loam
Altmar loamy fine sand
Appleton gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Appleton silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Arkport very fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Arkport fine sandy loam, gravelly substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Arkport fine sandy loam, gravelly substratum, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Bombay fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Bombay fine sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Canandaigua silt loam
Canandaigua silty clay loam
Cayuga and Cazenovia silt loams, 0 to 2. percent slopes
Cayuga and Cazenovia silt loams, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Cazenovia gravelly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Cazenovia gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Cazenovia gravelly silt loam, shale substratum, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Cazenovia gravelly silt loam, shale substratum, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Collamer silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Collamer silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Dunkirk silt.loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Elnora loamy fi.ne sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Elnora loamy fine sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Fredon gravelly loam
Galen very fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Galen very fine sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Hamlin silt loam
Hilton gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Hilton gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Hilton silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Hilton silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Howard gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Howard gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Hudson silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Lamson very fine sandy loam
Lamson fine sandy loam, gravelly substratum
Massena fine sandy loam
Monoa very fine sandy loam
Niagara silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Niagara silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Ontario loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Ontario loam, limestone substratum, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Ontario loam, limestone substratum, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Ovid silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Ovid silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Ovid silt loam, limestone substratum, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Ovid silt loam, limestone substratum, 3 to 8 percent slopes

PRIME FARMLAND (continued)

Niagara County, New York

Phelps gravelly loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes
Raynham silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Raynham silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Rhinebeck silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Rhinebeck silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Rhinebeck silt loam, thick surface variant
Schoharie silty clay loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes

Source: Niagara County Soil Survey, Issued October 1972.

PRIME FARMTLAND

Orange County, New York

Mapping Units

Allard silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Allard silt-loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Barbour fine sandy loam
Basher fine sandy loam
Carlisle muck
Carlisle muck, very deep
Castile gravelly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Castile gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Charlton fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Chenango gravelly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Chenango gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Collamer silt Loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Fredon loam
Mardin gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Middlebury silt loam
Palms muck
Pittsfield gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Raynham silt loam
Rhinebeck silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Rhinebeck silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Riverhead sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Riverhead sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Scio silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Scio silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Swartswood gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Tioga silt loam
Unadilla silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes
Wurtsboro gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes

Source: Orange County Soil Survey (manuscript).

PRIME FAiMLAND

Orleans County, New York

Mapping Units

Appleton silt loam, 0 to 3'percent slopes
Appleton silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Arkport very fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Bombay fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Bombay fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Carlisle muck
Cayuga silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Cazenovia silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Cazenovia silt loam,.,3 to 8 percent slopes
Cazenovia gravelly silt loam, shale substratum, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Cazenovia gravelly silt loam, shale substratum, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Churchville silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Churchville silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Claverack loamy fine sand, 0 to6 percent slopes
Collamer silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Collamer silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Cosad loamy fine sand
Edwards muck
Fredon loam
Galen very finei sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Galen very fine sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent sTopes
Hamlin silt lcam
Hilton loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Hilton loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Hilton loam, rock substratum, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Hilton loam, rock substratum, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Howard gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Madrid fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Massena fine sandy loam
Minoa very fine sandy loam
Niagara silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Niagara silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Odessa silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Odesqa silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Ontario loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Ontario loam, rock substratum, 0 to 8 percent slopes
Ovid silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Ovid silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Ovid silt loam, shale substratum, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Palms muck
Phelps gravelly fine sandy loam
Rhinebeck silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Rhinebeck silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Schoharie silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Teel silt loam
Wampsville gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slapes

Sources: Orleans County Soil Survey (manuscript).

PRIME FARiI LAND

Oswego County, New York

Mapping Units

Alton gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Alton gravelly fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Alton gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Amboy very fine sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Carlisle muck
Elmwood fine sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Fredon gravelly fine sandy loam
Herkimer shaly silt loan, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Hudson silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Ira gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Ira gravelly fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Massena silt loam
Middlebury loam
Minoa very fine sandy loam
Minoa fine sandy loam, moderately well drained variant, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Palms muck
Raynham silt loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Sodus gravelly fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Williamson very fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Williamson very fine sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes

Source: Oswego County Soil Survey (manuscript).

PRIME FAPILAND

Putnam, Rockland, and Westchester Counties, New York

Mapping Units

Agawam fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Charlton fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Cheshire gravelly snady loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Haven loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Haven loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Paxton fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Sodus gravelly fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Stockbridge gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Stockbridge gravelly fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Sutton fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Sutton fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Watchaug fine sandy loam
Woodbridge fine sardy loam, 0 to 3 percent slope.s
Woodbridge fine sardy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes

Source: Putnam, Rockland, and Westchester Counties Soil Survey (manuscript).

PRIME FARM-LAND

Rensselaer County, New York

Mapping Units

Albrights silt loam, 3.to 8 percent slopes
Belgrade very fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Belgrade very fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Bernardston gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent Elopes
Castleton gravelly silt loam
Chenango gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Chenango gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Elmwood very fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Elmwood very fine .sandy loan, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Fredon silt loam
Hamlin silt loam
Hartland silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Hartland silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Haven silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Haven silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Pittstown gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Rayhnam silt loam
Rhinebeck silt loaa, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Rhinebeck silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Riverhead fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Riverhead fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Swanton very fine sandy loam
Teel silt loam

Source: Rensselaer County Soil Survey (in progress).

PRIME FARMLAND

St. Lawrence County, New York

Soil Associations _/

Collamer-Niagara Association, gently sloping
Elmwood-Swanton Association, gently sloping
Xars Association, gently sloping
Niagara-Collamer Association, nearly level
Rhinebeck Association, nearly level

Source: General Soi. Map,'.St. Lawrence County, New York,
US.D.A., Soil Conservation Service in cooperation
with Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station.

The underlined memrbers of the soil association are considered
to be the prime farmland soils.

PRIME FARMLAND

Suffolk County, New York

Mapping Units

Bridgehampton silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Bridgehampton silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Bridgehampton silt loam, till substratum, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Haven loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Haven loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Haven loam, thick surface layer
Montauk fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Montauk fine sandy loam,. 3 to 8 percent slopes
Montauk silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Montauk silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Plymouth loamy sand, silty substratum, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Plymouth loamy sand, silty substratum, 3 to 8 pfercent slopes
Raynham loam
Riverhead sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Riverhead sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Scio silt loam, till substratum, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Scio silt loam, sandy substratum, 0 to 2 percen: slopes
Scio silt loam, sandy substratum, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Sudbury sandy loam
Wallington silt loam, till substratum

Source: Suffolk County Soil Survey, Issued April 1975.

PRIME FA.I-LAND

Ulster County, New York

Mapping Units

Barbour loam
Basher silt loam
Cambridge gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Castile gravelly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Castile gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Cayuga silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Chenango gravelly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Chenango gravelly silt -loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Hamlin silt loam
Haven loam
Hudson silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Mardin gravelly silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Middlebury silt loam
Pompton fine sandy loam
Riverhead fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Riverhead fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes.
Schoharie silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Scio silt loam
Teel silt loam
Tioga fine silt loam
Tunkhannock gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent sloper;
Tunkhannock gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Tunkhannock gravelly loam, clayey substratum, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Unadilla silt loam
Williamson silt loam, 0 to 3 percent lsopes
Williamson silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes

Source: Ulster County Soil Survey (manuscript).

PRIME FARMLAND

Wayne County, New York

Mapping Units

Alton gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 3-percent slopes
Alton gravelly sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Appleton loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes
Bombay gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Bombay gravelly fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 per-ent slopes
Carlisle muck
Cazenovia silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Cazenovia gravelly silt loam, bedrock substratum, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Cazenovia gravelly silt loam, bedrock substratum, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Collamer silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Dunkirk silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Edwards muck
Fredon loam
Hamlin silt loam
Hilton gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Hilton gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Hilton gravelly loam, bedrock substratum, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Hilton gravelly icam, bedrock substratum, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Ira gravelly fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Ira gravelly fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Madrid gravelly fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Massena gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Massena gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Minoa very fine sandy loam
Niagara silt loam
Ontario gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Ovid silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Ovid silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Palmyra gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Palmyra gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Phelps gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
Phelps gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Sodus gravelly fine sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes
Teel silt loam
Wallington silt loam
Williamson silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Williamson silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes

Source: Wayne County Soil Survey (manuscript).