Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWatershed Plan for Groundwater 1982Watershed Planmng for the Protection of Long Island's Groundwater. Watershed Planning for the Protection of Long Island's Groundwater. Edited by Ellen Greenberg, Sarah Meyland, and James T. B. Tripp Contributors David Allen Steven Englebright Ellen Greenberg Nancy Nagle Kelley Sarah Meyland Lorna Salzman James T.B. Tripp John Turner Sierra Club, Long Island Group Museum of Long Island Natural Sciences, SUNY Stony Brook N.Y. State Legislative Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long Island Group for the South Fork N.Y. State Legislative Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long Island Friends of the Earth Environmental Defense Fund N.Y. State Legislative Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long Island cover photo by John Cryan Printed, September, 1982 Copyr J. ght. 1982 TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT OF PURPOSE .................................... 1 Section I. DEVELOPMENT AND WATER DEGRADATION ON LONG ISLAND: AN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE .......... II. HYDROGEOLOGY AND LONG ISLAND'S WATERSHEDS ........ III. THE PINE BARRENS: A REGIONAL ASSET .............. IV. WATERSHED PRESERVATION PLkN FOR THE LONG ISLAND PINE BARRENS ......................... THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR PINE BARRENS PRESERVATION ..................................... VI. TODAY'S PROBLEMS AND TOMORROW'S THREATS .......... VII. CONCLUSION ....................................... 9 13 17 19 31 35 37 GLOSSARY ................................................ BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................. 38 41 iii TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1. Cross-Section of the Long Island Aquifer System .................................. 11 2. Major Vegetation of Long Island .................... 14 3. Critical Groundwater Watersheds ..................... 16 4. Deep Flow Recharge Areas ........................... 21 5. Concept Plan for Watershed Protection .............. 22 6a. Priority Acquisition Areas: Central Suffolk County ............................. 24 6b. Priority Acquisition Areas: South Fork of Long Island .......................... 25 7. A Suggested Allocation of Contributions -- Purchase/Condemnation of Hither Woods .............. 27 Table 1. Governmental Techniques for Watershed Protection .... 34 STATEMENT OF PURPOSE This report presents a plan to preserve and protect the remaining critical watersheds on Long Island and thus assure its residents a permanent supply of pure drinking water. The plan focuses on the Pine Barrens of Suffolk County but its concepts and principles are applicable in Nassau County as well: a non-structural approach to watershed protection based on the principle of non-degradation of existing water quality. The plan is designed to protect the Pine Barrens ecosystem and the groundwater recharged into the upper glacial aquifer directly beneath it and by so doing, protect the deeper recharge areas. It takes a preventive approach based on preserving the existing water quality in the Pine Barrens, and stresses land use controls available to local governments that can be implemented immediately and with minimum expenditure of public funds. The approach of existing agencies has been narrow and insufficient: two-acre zoning for critical recharge areas, concern for nitrate concentrations solely instead of the spectrum of known and potential organic contaminants, wellhead treatment, and "phased extension of public water mains" without any accompanying plans to protect the sources of such public supply from eventual degradation and contamination. The solutions to the vast and growing water problems on Long Island that have been proposed or are now utilized are not adequate to insure pure water for the future. Continuing present practices and policies mean certain incremental contamination of our drinking water supplies. If development and construction take place above our groundwater, it is only a matter of time before effluents (hydrocarbons, cesspool and landfill leachate, lawn and agricultural chemicals, etc.) percolate down into it. This report differs, therefore, from existing strategies because it maintains that a preventive, non-structural approach is possible, practical and imperative and because it pinpoints the specific tools and mechanisms available to local governments in a reasonable time span. Above all, what we propose will be far less costly in terms of public expenditures than "after-the-fact" remedial cleanup efforts. Thus, our approach stresses not wells, water mains, wellhead treatment, and public water supply but the need for comprehensive protection of entire watersheds: surface and groundwaters, streams, ponds, bogs, freshwater wetlands, rivers, and the interconnected drainage areas. In addition, instead of relying on high-technology and engineering approaches, our plan rests its confidence on local planning agencies and the full participation of concerned citizens as part of the planning process. This approach, a kind of "new localism," is all the more urgent as existing Federal laws, regulations and regulatory agencies continue to be weakened and dismantled, and locally developed, complex laws enforced at the whim of evanescent bureaucracies. We believe firmly that the mandate for environmental protection in general, and for stringent groundwater protection in particular on Long Island is loud and clear. Our report attempts to translate this concern and mandate into a conceptual plan for local action in a new vein and a new direction. We hope that this lead will be followed by the towns, planners and agencies of Long Island. Executive Summary and Recommendations Concern over the quality of the water in Long Island's underground aquifer system, Nassau and Suffolk Counties' sole source of water, has grown dramatically in recent years. As incidents of water contamination have increased, so have threats to water quality from a wide variety of sources. Since the Island's surface is a catchment area and pathway for all water recharged to the aquifer system below, land activities which generate pollutants pose serious threats to groundwater quality. The range of potentially contaminating activities is so great that virtually all forms of development jeopardize water quality. In fact, only when precipitation falls on undisturbed natural areas can we be assured of pristine water percolating to underground reservoirs. In light of these facts, steps must be taken to insure the maintenance of large areas of undisturbed land where groundwater is absorbed -- these areas are called groundwater recharge watersheds. Groundwater recharge watersheds, like surface water supply watersheds, need to be protected. Many municipalities which depend on surface water supplies have protected watersheds by precluding development. Nine hundred thousand (900,000) acres of watershed lands in the Catskills is owned and protected by New York City in recognition of the connection between undisturbed land and a pure water supply. Historically, however, this country's groundwater watersheds have not been protected with equal vigor -- presumably because groundwater is a hidden resource. We now know that contaminants freely move from the land surface into groundwater, thus the necessity of protecting groundwater and surface water watersheds. The progressive march of development, loss of natural vegetative cover, groundwater degradation, and the closure of public water supply wells that has occurred in the central portions of Nassau County and western Suffolk County are warnings to us that Lon~ Island must now focus on actions to prevent degradation of its remainin~ sources of high qualit~ ~roundwater. Such a policy of prevention can be achieved by the preservation of the remaining 112,OOO acres of Pine Barrens, the last large critical groundwater recharge watershed area of Long Island, as well as of smaller, though no less crucial, watershed areas in Nassau and Suffolk Counties. The Pine Barrens is a significant watershed area in part because its sandy soils facilitate rapid percolation of large volumes of precipitation deep into the groundwater system. Concomitantly, when present, contaminants on the land surface of the Pine Barrens freely migrate through these sandy soils into the groundwater. Therefore, long term maintenance of the Pine Barrens' groundwater system and the preservation of its unique ecology go hand in hand. In those areas where 9roundwate~ is of the highest quality and no contaminatin~ activities are present, the lon~-term water quality ~oal should ~- non-degradation, i.e.{ maintenance of existin~_~ure water quality. In these pristine areas, implem~-~tatl~ non-degradation policy means no development. The groundwater recharged into the Upper Glacial aquifer and the deeper Magothy aquifer represents the largest remaining body of pristine groundwater in Long Island. That groundwater extends far beyond the surficial boundaries of the Pine Barrens through continual subsurface flow outward toward Long Island's streams and bays (whose fisheries depend on the proper level of brackishness), and to the ocean. This subsurface flow means that the Pine Barrens act as a source of pure water which cleanses the water supplies of developed areas elsewhere. This same mechanism makes the preservation of undisturbed areas in Nassau of county-wide significance. Thus~ so lon~ as degradation of the quality of the ~roundwater recharged through undisturbed watershed areas is prevented, Lon~ Island is assured a vast reservoir of high quality water. Although many may accept the principle of preservation of an area the size of the Long Island Pine Barrens, finding acceptable institutional means for accomplishing this objective poses a difficult political, legal and economic dilemma. Fortunately, some 35,000 acres in the central Pine Barrens are now in public ownership, and hence not threatened by development pressures. 3 We recognize, however, that acquisition and outright public ownership will preserve only a part of that portion of the Pine Barrens which is now in private ownership. The towns, assisted by different levels of government, must therefore use a combination of land use planning techniques to pursue the objective of safeguarding Long Island's groundwater s~pply through watershed protection programs. These techniques include reduced density zoning, mandatory clustering, transfer of development credit programs, controls on removal of natural vegetation, landfill prohibitions and strict controls on public investments which support infrastructural development. Planning for the preservation of such a resource system must go hand in hand with planning for where development should proceed and what form that development should take. Thus, in making a societal decision to protect the Pine Barrens, we assume responsibility for identifying those areas where more intensive development would appropriately accommodate displaced growth. In general, these growth areas may be located on the periphery of the central Pine Barrens, particularly in existing villages. In the case of Long Island's South Fork, the idea of accommodating all displaced growth may not be appropriate, due to water supply constraints. In this area, the techniques proposed in this report could be used to restrict overall density within the Towns of East Hampton and Southampton. Such a metamorphosis of land use patterns represents a significant change from the model of development which has swept eastward through Nassau and Suffolk Counties in the past 35 years. The Towns of Brookhaven, Riverhead, Southampton and East Hampton, Suffolk County, and the State of New York, together with the planning and scientific talent which is available on Long Island, and with strong public support, have the means to preserve the eastern Long Island Pine Barrens. The towns of North Hempstead and Oyster Bay, Nassau County, and the State of New York, have the means to preserve Nassau County's critical rec'~arge areas. They can do so in a manner which will serve as a model for thousands of communities elsewhere in the country struggling to protect water and natural resources while accommodating economic development and population growth. Long Island, in protecting its own groundwater resource for future generations, will be paving the way for groundwater protection programs throughout the nation. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. General Recommendations A. Long Island's groundwater supplies should be protected through the implementation of watershed protection plans in undisturbed critical watershed areas in Nassau and Suffolk Counties. B. A program of action should be implemented through regional planning and management designed to protect the existing vegetation of the Pine Barrens, to'preclude all development in the undisturbed critical watershed areas of the Pine Barrens add channel it into suitable growth areas, and to control all discharges of pollutants from all sources in the Pine Barrens. C. Watershed protection plans for the Pine Barrens should be designed to protect the Upper Glacial aquifer. In this manner the deeper aquifers will be protected. 2. Policy Initiatives The following policy initiatives should be adopted by the Towns of Brookhaven, Riverhead, Southampton and East Hampton, and the County of Suffolk, with assistance from the Long Island Regional Planning Board, County and State Health Departments and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation through amendments to land use plans: A. Recognition of the Pine Barrens as the largest remaining critical groundwater recharge watershed area of Long Island; B. Recognition of the Pine Barrens as a vital ecological resource; and C. Adoption and application of a stringent non-degradation standard to the groundwaters recharged through the Pine Barrens and the surface waters into which such groundwater discharges. 3. Recommended Actions The following techniques should be utilized by the towns and county in order to maintain the pristine quality of the Pine Barrens' groundwater and to preserve its forest communities: A. Public acquisition of priority protection parcels and public retention of tax default properties; B. Use of zoning to the maximum extent feasible to 1. reduce residential development densities and limit commercial activity and public infrastructural 5 development in the Pine Barrens, and 2. redirect development, when appropriate, into designated growth areas in and around existing population centers outside of the critical areas. C. Use of mandatory clustering to the maximum extent feasible to limit development in the most critical portions of the Pine Barrens and concentrate it, instead, in designated growth areas. D. Channeling of future growth into and around existing villages which are outside of primary recharge areas. E. Limiting of town, state, county and federal infrastructural investments which support or promote development in the Pine Barrens and facilitate such investments to support residential development in designated growth areas. F. Design and implementation of a transfer of development credit system to facilitate redirecting growth out of the Pine Barrens into designated growth areas and establish a development credit exchange institution with public funds as an initial source of capital. G. Identification of acquired with whatever are available. priority protection areas to be public or privately donated funds H. Phasing out of all dumps, landfills and other major point sources of contamination within the Pine Barrens. I. Institution of a prohibition of all fertilizer and pesticide use for other than agricultural purposes and restriction of agricultural use to absolute minimums. J. Restriction of the removal of natural vegetative cover. K. Implementation of regulations which will prohibit any increase in the discharge of contaminating chemicals or waste, and any new sources of nitrates, organics or salts in the critical groundwater recharge area of the Pine Barrens. L. Designation of all proposed development projects within the Pine Barrens watershed area as Type One actions under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) requiring preparation of an environmental impact statement. 6 4. Water Utility Initiative Implementation of an Island-wide water surcharge to finance acquisition of critical groundwater watersheds. 5. State and Federal Legislative. Initiatives Legislation should be enacted at the state and federal levels to support cooperative local/regional/state efforts to preserve the Pine Barrens through capitalization of a land credit exchange institution. (Such legislation is currently being considered in the proposed federal Sole Source Aquifer Protection Act.) 6. Public Lands Ail town, county, state and federal public lands in the Pine Barrens should be managed as critical groundwater watershed areas which are part of a unique ecosystem. I. DEVELOPMENT AND WATER DEGRADATION ON LONG ISLAND: AN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE European settlers first arrived at the fish-shaped land known as Long Island in the early 16OO's. Captains' logs from that period describe how sailors knew they were approaching the land before it was sighted by the strong, fragrant smell of the Island's native wildflowers. Early settlers praised the abundant resources of Long Island -- fish-filled rivers and bays, plentiful shellfish and game, rich and fertile soils, trees for ship building, mild winter weather, and abundant supplies of pure water. Agriculture, fishing and ship building were the principal pursuits of Long Islanders during this early stage of development. While agrarian Long Island grew slowly, the nearby settlement of New Amsterdam quickly became a major population center. By 1800, the twin cities of New York and Brooklyn had grown up around New York Harbor. In Brooklyn, farms soon gave way to urban and commercial establishments. Open space began to disappear. During this early period of growth, Brooklyn's water supply needs were satisfied with water drawn from the aquifer system underlying the developed area. By 1850, Brooklyn was highly developed, Queens was primarily suburban, and Nassau and Suffolk Counties were areas for farming, large hunting preserves and vacation estates for wealthy New Yorkers. As human activity on Long Island increased, so did the impact of societal actions on the environment. In the mid-18OO's, it was discovered that over-pumping of groundwater from the aquifer under Brooklyn had caused a lowering of the water table to 35 feet below sea level. Salt water from the surrounding bays invaded the depleted freshwater supply, damaging the Brooklyn aquifer to such a degree that it was abandoned as soon as groundwater supplies were developed in adjacent southern Queens and Nassau Counties. This pattern of development, first seen in Brooklyn, was repeated in Queens with a similar drawdown of the groundwater supply following intensified land use and development, and the subsequent switch to use of New York City's surface water supply system in much of the County. Recently, the problem of groundwater mining has moved eastward into Nassau County, causing a lowering of the water table, the drying up of streams, and the potential destruction of the valuable shellfishing resources of the South shore. Now, issues regarding groundwater quality, as well as quantity, are of growing concern throughout Long Island. Today, furthermore, the focus on water quality problems has shifted from concern over salt water intrusion to overloading of groundwater supplies with nitrogen-containing compounds and the discovery in the groundwater system of synthetic organic chemicals. The groundwater quality problems created by these substances pose ever greater threats to human health and environmental integrity. The impacts of established patterns of groundwater pumpage, coupled with the' long-standing practice of unfettered development of all available land, extends beyond the lowering of the water table and the drying up of streams to the rapid drawdown of these contaminants to the deeper aquifers. An examination of Nassau County's water picture vividly illustrates today's water resource dilemmas. The Magothy Aquifer (see Figure 1) is the source of 90% of Nassau County's drinking water. This overwhelming reliance on the Magothy in Nassau is due to the extensive pollution of the shallower water table aquifer known as the Upper Glacial (see Figure 1). The significance of this dependence on the Magothy is better understood by considering the naturally slow rate of water movement in the aquifer absent any disruption to flow caused by pumpage. In the Magothy, it takes approximately 800 years from the time precipitation falls on the center of the Island for water to sink into the ground, join the groundwater and slowly move in a point seaward of the barrier islands such as Jones Beach. In the Lloyd Aquifer, the cleanest and deepest of the three major aquifer layers, the same process takes 3,000 years, if flow is not disrupted by pumpage. Once contaminated, it takes hundreds to thousands of years for an aquifer to cleanse itself naturally. On the South Fork, virtually all (93%) of the water is drawn from the saturated strata of the Upper Glacial aquifer. While in most parts of Long Island, fresh water in the aquifers extends down to bedrock, on the South Fork portions of the Magothy and all of the Lloyd aquifers are contaminated by salt water. The limited volume of fresh water on the South Fork makes this area more vulnerable to problems of both water quantity and quality. The water most Nassau residents drink is hundreds to thousands of years old. For the most part, the high quality of this "old water" reflects the undisturbed conditions of watershed areas where it first fell to earth as precipitation. Today, water suppliers keep ahead of the contamination of recent decades by drilling wells deeper in the Magothy or relocating wells when water quality standards are violated. This strategy, however, can supply clean water for only a limited period of time. The water slowly moving deeper into the Magothy is not the clean water of 10 Figure One Cross-Section of the Long Island Aquifer System r~r." f~! ATMOSPHERIC WATER ,~ ,.~i: ,~ ((Mo,sture content mainly ,n the torm o( water vapor)" ..~ '4., North South Cross section of Long Island showing sources and types of water, major hydrogeologic units, and paths of ground- water flow. [Modified from Cohen and others, 1968.] 11 several hundred years ago, but the contaminated water of recent years. In time, the dirty water which has caused the abandonment of the Upper Glacial as a source of water for much of Nassau County will spread throughout much of the Magothy. Naturally pure water may then become a thing of the past for over a million Long Islanders. Already, tests of public supply wells in Nassau County show an alarming incidence of contamination. Nassau County tested 368 wells for contamination by synthetic organic chemicals using a level of 50 parts per billion (ppb) for a single contaminant and 100 ppb for a combination of chemicals, as the point at which a well must be closed. The results were as follows: 63% (233 wells) did not show any level of contamination 26% ( 97 wells) contained contaminants at 1-10 ppb 7% ( 24 wells) contained contaminants at 10-50 ppb 4% ( 14 wells) contained contaminants at greater than 50 ppb. When examining organic contamination within each aquifer, the concentration of pollutants in the Upper Glacial is apparent, with 62% of those Upper Glacial wells tested for organics contaminated to some degree. The worst cases of contamination in Nassau stretch across the middle of the County, approximately following the trend of the Hempstead-North Hempstead town line. This front of organic contamination coincides with the mo~_ hi~l_~ industrialized and commercially developgd R~rtion of the Count~. In terms of hydrogeologic conditions, this area also coincides with the central recharge watershed for Nassau County. Rain recharged in this area will continue to carry toxic contaminants deep and far into the aquifer system and move these toxics shoreward to become a threat to users "downstream" of the front. The best water quality in Nassau is found to the North, in an area which is still rich in open space and undisturbed woodlands. The correlation between undisturbed watershed lands and water quality is vividly demonstrated by the marked contrast in water quality from the North Shore to the more central area of Nassau County. This correlation between land use and groundwater quality is the basis of our approach to the maintenance of a safe and clean water supply for all of Long Island -- an approach emphasizing critical watershed protection and preservation. 12 II. HYDROGEOLOGY AND LONG ISLAND'S WATERSHEDS Long Island geology is characterized primarily by sands and gravels that readily absorD rain and other forms of precipitation. Precipitation percolates through the unsaturated layers of sand and gravel until it reaches the water table where it joins ~he groundwater reservoir, as groundwater. These sand and gravel formations which hold a vast quantity of water beneath Long Island are known as aquifers. Figure 1 represents a cross-section of Long Island depicting its three major aquifers and the water table. Although the Island's three major individual aquifers can be technically distinguished from one another, groundwater moves between them and they behave essentially as one. From absorption at the surface -- a process called recharge -- to discharge into lakes, streams, and the surrounding bays and ocean, groundwater is transmitted slowly through the aquifers under the influence of gravity and pressure. A groundwater watershed may be defined as that portion of a landscape through which groundwater recharge occurs. Figure ~ graphically shows how recharge occurs. On Long Island, naturally vegetated groundwater watersheds have been much reduced in area due tp extensive development. Figure 2 is a map which graphically depicts the boundaries of the historical major plant communities which dominated the ~sland's central recharge watershed areas -- the Hempstead Plains (originally 45,000 acres, now 62 acres); the Oak Brush Plains (originally 50,000 acres, now 3,000 acres), and the Pine Barrens (originally 200,000 acres, now about 112,OO0 acres). The remaining naturally vegetated watershed areas which still possess an abundant, pristine water resource of significant public value are referred to as critical groundwater watersheds {see Figure 3). Critical groundwater watersheds are generally located in the center of Long Island. Here, the depth to which water recharges is at its greatest -- a phenomenon that causes the interior of Long Island to act as a deep flow recharge zone (see Figure 4). The precipitation recharged through the center of Long Island, i.e., through critical groundwater watersheds, has a long residence time, measured in terms of decades, centuries or longer. This time in the groundwater system contrasts with that of precipitation recharged closer to the North or South shores. A similar process operates on the North and South Forks but the depth of recharge is shallower. 13 Figure Two 0 14 Since the precipitation recharged in the center of the Island stays in the groundwater system longer than that absorbed at the Island's periphery, a substantial fraction of all groundwater in storage is recharged through the critical watershed areas. Thus, protection of a given area of critical watershed land has a disproportionately greater effect on the quality of the groundwater in the aquifer system as a whole. Additionally, the sandy soils which are characteristic of the middle portion of Long Island mean that rates of recharge are somewhat higher there than elsewhere. Finally, because of these geologic and geographic conditions, contaminants on the land in the middle section of the Island readily enter the groundwater and, once there, slowly move deep into the aquifers and remain underground for long periods of time, measured in terms of hundreds or thousands of years. An understanding of the physical nature of Long Island's hydrogeologic system sheds light on why most serious regional groundwater contamination problems result from pollution sources -- landfills, industrial impoundments, highways, commercial areas, fertilizers, pesticides and septic systems -- located within critical groundwate~ watershed areas. These factors demonstrate why improper land use and the presence of contaminants in critical groundwater watershed areas are the principal factors determining the long-term quality of most of Long island's groundwater. This analysis suggests that protection of the remaining naturally vegetated critical groundwater watersheds of Long Island is essential for the maintenance of a large reservoir of high quality groundwater. One of the important water quality functions of the Pine Barrens and other critical groundwater watersheds ste~s from the constant subsurface flow of groundwater, and extends well beyond the actual surface boundary of the pine and oak forests of the Island's interior. Because precipitation which enters the ground in the middle of the Island moves through the pore spaces of the sandy subst~ate towsr~ the marine waters that surround Long Island, wells in the surrounding coastal communities receive a continual influx of pure water. This effect is enormously important because it flushes pollutants away from coastal community wells and helps to maintain their overall water quality. If the rem~ini~ Pine Barrens and oak ~%_~%~sd~s_~%~%~ a__r~ not protec~e_d_[__the c____~l~s_~_in_~ action now ~roz~__to__~% drinkin~ water wells of coastal communities by ~_h_%_q~5~ flow of ~roundwater towards the _~__~%~%__b~e.__~%~Z~ ~m_promised. 15 Figure Three 16 III. THE PINE BARRENS: A REGIONAL ASSET It is crucial to view the hydrogeologic and ecologic importance of the Pine Barrens from a regional, Island-wide perspective. Because water will be the ultimate constraint on growth on Long Island, the quantity and quality of water recharged into the ground in this watershed is of vital concern to all area residents. The Pine Barrens formerly extended throughout much of central Long Island (see Figure 3). Contiguous tracts of the Pine Barrens now cover some 112,0OO acres in the Suffolk County towns of Brookhaven, Riverhead, Southampton and East Hampton (see Figures 4 and 5). This is the largest glacial Pine Barrens in the world (the New Jersey Pine Barrens was not glaciated) and is widely recognized as a critical ecological system. Consisting of a mosaic of plant communities and landscapes, the Pine Barrens is and has been shaped by a number of ecological factors -- the frequency and intensity of wild fire, the sandy, nutrient poor soils, the depth to the water table, and the quality of groundwater. In the upland forests of the Pine Barrens, pitch pine is the dominant tree; in some regions this species forms an unbroken canopy, while in other areas, generally morainal, it shares the canopy with various oak species. Growing in the shadowy swamps of the Pine Barrens are Atlantic white cedar, red maple, and black tupelo. Beneath the pine and oak canopy is a well-developed thicket of woody shrubs such as bear oak, black huckleberry and the fragrant sweet fern. In the distinctive dwarf pine plains, an area of about 2,000 acres south of Riverhead, a unique dwarf form of the pitch pine is found. The dominant Pine Barrens tree species, the pitch pine, is often referred to as a fire climax species. It competes well against other forest species in the sandy soil of the Pine Barrens since it survives fire most effectively. Fires occur with some frequency in the Pine Barrens, because rain percolates rapidly through the sandy soils, and a dry litter accumulates at the surface of the land. Ail wetland plant species found in the Pine Barrens are adapted to the nutrient-poor water characteristic of the area. Nutrient-poor water, which is low in nitrate and phosphate, is not only hospitable to Pine Barrens vegetation, but is high quality potable water as well. These relationships illustrate the links between the vegetation of the Pine Barrens and the purity of the area's groundwater supply. The area's distinctive vegetation is 17 not only an indicator of water quality, but its safeguard as well, since, as long as the Pine Barrens ecosystem is uDdisturbed, contaminating activities will be effectively barred from the critical groundwater watershed areas. The vast reservoir of high quality groundwater that exists beneath the Pine Barrens is both a potential water supply source and an extremely important aspect of the Pine Barrens ecosystem. It is estimated that between 3.5 and 5.2 trillion gallons of water are stored in the saturated layers of the aquifers beneath Long Island's pine-oak forests. Approximately 175,000,O00 gallons of water are recharged daily through the 112,OOO acres of the Long Island Pine Barrens. Through subsurface flow, this high quality groundwater supply reaches far beyond the surface boundaries of the Pine Barrens landscape. While groundwater quality in the Pine Barrens is generally high, ~onitoring wells indicate that it has been degraded in localized areas due to a variety of land uses. The writing is on the wall: if initiative is not taken now to control land uses and preserve the Pine Barrens and other critical watershed areas, all of Long Island will be faced with health, environmental and economic problems oE immense ~agnitude. 18 IV. WATERSHED PRESERVATION PLAN FOR THE LONG ISLAND PINE BARRENS The character of the Long Island Pine Barrens, the nature of the Island's hydrogeology and groundwater watersheds and the history of development and degradation in the Nassau and Suffolk Counties all point to the need for a dramatic departure from traditional growth patterns. We have seen that those patterns are all too clearly reflected by the course of water quality degradation. Long Island residents are faced with some basic policy choices. The protection of Long Island watersheds necessitates a firm area-wide commitment to the preventive approach of watershed preservation based on a strict non-degradation standard in critical recharge areas. Planning for, and enforcing such regulation will assure communities of future high quality water supplies without costly infrastructural improvements for transporting or treating water, such as the Southwest Sewer District. Such_~a co___m_mitment wi__~ r__e_~uire the ado~ption of a Ro. sitive a~.itq~e %ow__~a~ds regulated growth and land use activities and the acceptance bz local ~overnments of their responsibility ~o p~ot~ct ~nv{-~o~-~-e-~talJ ~uaili~_~__n_d_-~-_~b_-~-_~~ health. Protection of our water resources can be accomplished through the use of the diverse techaiques presented in the following ~ages. Listed below are the f~ndings which underlie our suggestions for management, development amd preservation programs, our concept for an area-wide watershed protection plan and our suggestions for implementation strategies. It is hoped that this section and that addressing the legal framework for watershed preservation will spur community and government efforts at comprehensive planning for watershed protection. FI. NDINGS Our suggested management, development and preservation strategies are based upon the following findings which we have developed in this report. 1. Drinking water is contaminated or jeopardized in many parts of Long Island due to existing land use activities and water quality degradation is a major cause for concern. 2. Watershed preservation based on a non-degradation standard in undisturbed areas is the wisest and most practical approach to protecting Long Island's groundwater, 19 because there are large areas of undeveloped contiguous land in a clearly delineated area which lend themselves to land use and watershed management; because the non-degradation principle can facilitate and promote other values in the Pine Barrens such as ecosystem preservation, scientific study, recreation, and tourism; because the undeveloped nature of the Pine Barrens precludes the need for any extensive infrastructure such as roads, utilities, public services, transportation; because proper watershed management can preclude the need for costly public water mains and treatment systems, and because of the high cost and practical impossibility of cleaning up an aquifer once it has contaminated. 3. The preservation of the Long groundwater and ecologic resource the entire region. Island Pine Barrens as a will benefit residents of 4. Geographic location of population centers and land use activities may be more important determinants of groundwater quality than the total number of residents or residential dwelling units. Protection of the Pine Barrens, however, may require significant shifts in the distribution, nature, and intensity of growth in Suffolk County. 5. An appropriate watershed preservation plan for the Pine Barrens will employ a mixture of techniques. Acquisition, clustering, zoning changes, transfer of development credit programs and proper siting of public facilities are all necessary tools to restrict development in the Pine Barrens critical watershed areas and to promote it in designated villages or growth areas. CONCEPT PLAN These findings lead to the development of the recommendations presented in our Executive Summary and to the concept plan for the preservation of the Pine Barrens which is put forth in the report. While one option for the preservation of the Pine Barrens would be the prohibition of all further population growth and development in the entire Pine Barrens region, it is not a feasible alternative. It would rightly be considered unacceptable by certain sectors of the local economy, and exclusionary in character. The second option is to allow the status quo to continue to promote intense development that will inevitably lead to incremental groundwater contamination. Our plan seeks to achieve a balance between resource preservation and growth, recognizing the economic value of protection of our water supply as well as the importance of regulated growth and development. We advocate the implementation of diverse 20 21 Figure Four i, Figure Five \\ \ strategies to divert new growth and development out of the central Pine Barrens and funnel controlled growth into the villages and their peripheries. Figure 5 depicts our concept plan for the conservation of the Pine Barrens and the development of peripheral areas in the towns of Brookhaven, Riverhead, Southampton and East Hampton. Virtually all of the 112,000 acres of the Pine Barrens are shown as a critical groundwater recharge watershed area where natural vegetation and soil cover should be retained. Our concept plan calls for a non-degradation program in the pristine acreage of the Pine Barrens, which will require the prohibition of further residential, commercial, industrial and public facility development. We have indicated that land use controls which restrict development in critical watershed areas of the Pine Barrens should be coupled with policies designed to accommodate displaced growth through more concentrated development elsewhere. 'In keeping with this philosophy, we have designated potential growth areas, principally in existing villages along the periphery of the Pine Barrens. These growth areas are depicted on Figure 5. STRATEGIES 1. Acquisition: Public ownership of critical watershed areas allows for complete control of land use activities. In certain areas, acquisition may be the only way to guarantee total preservation of natural vegetative and soil cover as well as total prohibition of contaminating activities. Priority protection areas, areas requiring acquisition for effective protection, are determined by both ecological and hydrological significance. In the Pine Barrens watershed regions, these two criteria are intertwined. Areas which are of great ecologic and hydrologic value are generally found along the midline o-6-f--the Ronkonkoma moraine and along the upper reaches of the outwash plains. Priority protection areas are graphically depicted in Figures 6A and 6B. Following the designation of priority parcels for acquisition, potential funding sources must be identified. Below is an outline of potential sources which should be considered in attempts to make funding arrangements for acquisition of priority protection parcels. 23 ~undin~ Sources for Acquisition of Priority Parcels GOVERNMENT: - Towns - Counties - State - Federal May purchase watershed lands independently or jointly, through cooperative or matching funding arrangements. PRIVATE: - Foundation grants - Land bequests to public jurisdiction - Acquisition by private conservation organizations CONSUMER/PUBLIC Bond issues (For acquisition of specific parcels or for establishment of a watershed preservation fund) Surcharge on water (A water surcharge imposed by water suppliers would broaden water suppliers' concerns beyond single well sites and would benefit present and future water consumers. The imposition of a surcharge would establish a fund for acquisition of priority par3els of watershed lands.) As the largest water supplier in Suffolk County, the Suffolk County Water Authority should initiate a water surcharge program immediately to support a fund to acquire Pine Barrens recharge watershed areas. (For an example of one local approach for funding watershed acquisition, see Figure 7.) 2. LAND USE REGULATIONS: Given the limits of acquisition as a watershed preservation strategy, land use regulation must play a pivotal role in watershed planning. Land use controls can be used to direct growth out of critical areas and to control discharges in developed areas as well. The following suggest the areas where land use controls can be used -- planning, density control, discharge control, economic incentives and disincentives, and government programs -- and the specific mechanisms which can be implemented in watershed protection plans. 26 2'7 A. PLANNING AND ZONING: Updating of town master plans to include watershed protection plans. Identification of critical watershed areas and priority acquisition parcels Development of a fire management plan Conservation easements Changes in zoning ordinances (Downzoning in designated growth areas, in preservation areas) upzoning Mandatory clustering (Ail municipalities within New York State now have the authority to enact a mandatory clustering law.) Transfer of Development Rights (A transfer of developmeat credit program would designate protection and growth areas, and would provide property owners in the p~otection area with credits representing lost development val~e which could be sold to a developer in a growth area who would use it to build to higher densities than would otherwise be allowable. Such a system will function only if one planning oF land use control entity has the authority to limit control and/or expan~ development in designated protection and growth areas. Burlington County, New Jersey has recently funded an exchange boar~ to facilitate the exchange of Pinelands development Credits established as part of the New 3ersey Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan.) (A moratorium may be instituted pending the creation and adoption of these activities.) B. DISCHARGE CONTROL: Performance Standards (Zoning ordinances incorporating performance standards should be used to focus on the impacts of development and should be quantifiable and capable of being 28 measured.) Prohibition of Contaminating Activities (Including dumps, landfills, and other major point sources, and non-point sources such as fertilizers and pesticides,) C. ECONOMIC INCENTIVES AND DISINCENTIVES: Infrastructure Investment (Public funds for infrastructure should be invested in such a way as to discourage private development in the protection area and to promote it in designated growth centers. Public funds for major projects should be contingent upon watershed protection plans.) Tax Incentives (Tax incentives should encourage retention of large land holdings, donation of land to the public, and private development in growth areas rather than in preservation areas.) Fairer allocation of the tax burden for watershed/open space acquisition. D. GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS: New York State Programs State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) (All proposed development projects within the Pine Barrens watershed area should be designated as Type 1 actions requiring preparation of an environmental impact statement.) State Freshwater Wetlands Act (No permits under the Act for dredging, filling or drainage of wetlands within the Pine Barrens protection area should be issued.) Federal Programs Clean Water Act (No permits under the Act for dredging, filling or drainage of wetlands within the Pine Barrens protection area should be issued.) Safe Drinking Water Act (The Sole Source Aquifer Program, under the 5aJe Drinking Water Act, reviews federally financially 29 assisted projects on Long Island and in other designated sole source areas throughout the country. This program would be greatly expanded by the passage of the proposed Sole Source Aquifer Protection Act as an amendment to Section 1424(e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act. That Act would provide federal funds for local planning for management of special protection areas (critical groundwater recharge watersheds) within sole source aquifer areas following designation by the Governor of such watershed areas. It would also provide some federal funds as seed capital for land credit exchange institutions to facilitate transfer of development out of critical watershed areas into appropriate growth areas.) See Table one for a synopsis of local techniques. 30 V. THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR PINE BARRENS PRESERVATION The willingness of courts even those which might be of four major factors, as to uphold land use restrictions, perceived as severe, is a function follows: FIRST, a court must be convinced of the significance of the social goal of the restriction. In addition, the goal must be conceptually clear. Maintenance of the quality of the groundwater recharged through critical groundwater watersheds, as well as preservation of unique ecosystems such as the Long Island Pine Barrens, is an important, clear and persuasive objective. SECOND, the scientific evidence supporting the goal and justifying the land use restrictions must be sound and comprehensive. In our view, the scientific evidence in support of a program to protect the groundwater and vegetative resources of the Pine Barrens is overwhelming. Scientific data to justify a plan of the extent we propose here to protect the Pine Barrens' watershed lands has been gathered by the Long Island Regional Planning Board, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the Suffolk County Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Geological Survey, and Long Island's towns, scientific institutions, and conservation groups. The task of the towns and the county is to marshall this evidence in a clear conceptual framework. THIRD, courts typically favor land use restrictions which are part of an area-wide management plan with regional social goals. Such goals can be articulated in region-wide plans or state or federal legislation. The legal position of the Town of Brookhaven in the state and federal litigation brought to challenge its two-acre zoning was strengthened by the fact that the Long Island Regional Planning Board's 208 Study, conducted with federal funds, endorsed such land use restrictions as minimal requirements in Zone III, the hydrogeologic zone in which the rezoned 11,000 acres are located. Consideration of the regional characteristics of goals and land use restrictions is essential in planning for the preservation of the Pine Barrens, as is cooperation among the four towns and Suffolk County. Since the benefits of watershed preservation extend beyond the watershed area itself, protection programs clearly reflect regional needs. Protection of the Pine Barrens as unique ecosystem is a regional goal. can adequately protect this resource. a watershed area and No one town by itself Further, if only one 31 town embarks on a land use program to protect this resource, its motives can be questioned. If each town adopts land use restrictions as part of a regional resource program which regional planning and state agencies have endorsed, the motives of the individual towns cannot be questioned. FOURTH, the legal validity of town land use activities which are designed to protect the Pine Barrens will be strengthened if those actions include downzonings (increases in residential development densities) as well as upzonings. A town plan which would protect the Pine Barrens solely through imposition of a restraint on growth will not be as readily defensible as one designed to redistribute growth out of conservation areas and into existing population or growth centers situated in less environmentally sensitive areas. A plan which incorporates both upzonings, downzonings and mandatory clustering to protect the Pine Barrens would be difficult to challenge on exclusionary grounds. Regional resource conservation programs which satisfy all of these criteria have been sustained in court even though the land use restrictions may be severe. Examples are the regional plans for the Adirondacks Park and the New 3ersey Pine Barrens. Both include density restrictions in the range of one dwelling unit per 15 acres to 40 acres. Such restrictions are far more severe than what exists in any of the four Pine Barrens towns of eastern Long Island. In the core preservation area of the New Jersey Pine Barrens, even more stringent limitations on residential development have been upheld where landowners have received as compensation Pineland Development credits which may be used to intensify permitted densities in designated growth areas. The Town of Brookhaven was the object of a legal challenge after some 11,OOO acres in the Manorville-Calverton area in the Pine Barrens were rezoned to a minimum lot size of two acres in 1975. Suits were brought in both state and federal ~ourt. Both courts vindicated the Brookhaven rezoning which was intended to protect the quality of its groundwater. The Brookhaven cases demonstrate that sound master plan and zoning ordinance revisions designed in part to attain natural resource objectives are defensible in court. Courts have upheld land use regulations that result in 75 to 90% diminution in the value of property; they have also, as the U.S. Court of Claims has recently ruled in Deltona v. United States, 657 F. 2d 1184 (Ct. C1. 1981) , ruled that restrictions on the use of property (in this case, predominantly wetlands) did not deprive the owner of all r. easonable use of its property where Corps of Engineers permit denials would allow development of only a small fraction of the total wetland/upland acreage at issue. Even more severe restrictions, i.e., prohibitions on development, can be justified, in our opinion, if the towns, with the support of Suffolk County and the state were to adopt a transfer of development credit program with an institutional base to assure its implementation. Since towns and counties in the country have had so little experience with such programs, there is a dirth of legal authority on their validity. However, in the Penn Central case, the U.S. Supreme Court held that such credits may be considered in deciding whether a property owner has a reasonable use of his property so long as their value is not unduly speculative. The establishment of a land credit exchange institution, with some minimal capitalization, as part of a regional program designed to redistribute growth should satisfy this criterion. With such a program, vast tracts of the Pine Barrens could be subject to no development and therefore protected as a pristine, watershed recharge area. 33 Table One Governmental Techniques for Watershed Protection ITansfer of Develop- ment F~ghts ac~s, and other laws L~cal goverranent home rule authorzty Roads, sewers, and water mains are ess- mntlal for intensive urban development; :ne control of types and locations of facili- ties can protect sources without the necessity of land pur- chase or regulation Provides the potential ~or simultaneously keeping proper~y on tax rolls a~d control- llng land use of a propOsed develop- 34 VI. TODAY'S PROBLEMS AND TOMORROW'S THREATS The history of the residential, commercia~ and industrial development of Long Island can well be illustrated by looking at the gradual degradation of its groundwater resources. As development has spread eastward so has contamination, accompanied by a search for new sources of supply deeper in the aquifer and further to the east in rural areas. The same kinds of threats that destroyed the shallower aquifers in Queens, Nassau and western Suffolk County are imminent in mid- and eastern Suffolk. What seem to be isolated incidents of wellwater contamination, public and private, are turning into a general overall creeping pattern of pollution, and well closings, particularly in the central spine of the island, the area of deepest recharge. Documentation exists regarding Temik contamination from agricultural applications in eastern Suffolk, spreading of landfill leachate in Nassau and Suffolk landfills (Port Washington, Islip, Southampton), and poisoning of water supplies from synthetic organic chemicals in Nassau; the release of radionuclides from Brookhaven Laboratories has been discovered in the Peconio River and continues from on-site radioactive waste dumps. But new threats are presenting themselves in the as yet unspoiled Pine Barrens and deep flow recharge areas elsewhere on Long Island. East Hampton Town: proposed Hither Woods development, South Fork highway extension, overdevelopment in Napeague, Barcelona Neck, Grace Estate, accelerated second home construction in northwest woods moraine. Southampton Town: proposed Teamsters project in Westhampton, North Sea landfill leachate, proposed Bridgehampton racetrack condominium project on the moraine, South Fork highway extension, Temik contamination, potential industrial development at Suffolk County Airport, proposed subdivision adjacent to Quogue Wildlife Refuge. Brookhaven Town: R and D Plaza near William Floyd Parkway and Long Island Expressway, Omnia Properties (Nugent Drive), new asphalt and gravel operation, Sills Road Industrial Park (County Road 101 to William Floyd). Oyster Bay: Underhill Property. 35 North Hempstead: Whitney - Payson Estates area. County level: sewering projects, major commercial development in deep flow areas. At the federal level, threats to Long Island's water supply come in the form of regulatory and funding changes which will weaken the programs designed to protect our groundwater. These include: proposed relinquishing of Section 404, Clean Water Act oversight by Army Corps of Engineers to states (NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation) imperils freshwater wetlands and navigable waters everywhere; proposed amendments to both the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Clean Water Act would undermine drinking water standards and toxic control; dismantling and underfunding of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will weaken EPA monito£ing, oversight and testing programs and permit lax state level enforcement as presently practiced; testing for new chemicals prior to marketing would rely on aanufacturer and private laboratories that have proven unreliable. 36 VII. CONCLUSION Long Island's last remaining large contiguous tract of naturally vegetated groundwater recharge watershed lands is the ll2,000-acre Pine Barrens in eastern Suffolk County. If the Pine Barrens are developed and the vast groundwater reservoir recharged through it degraded, Long Island will no longer have available to it a large pristine groundwater source. Preservation of this critical hydrogeological and ecological resource should therefore be a social imperative for Long Island. The opportunity to preserve this resource is still available since it is largely undeveloped. However, the time for action is now. Preservation of the Pine Barrens requires the identification of a clear concept of an objective. Our objective is clear and compelling -- total preservation of the natural vegetation of the critical watersheds of the Pine Barrens as the only cost-effective approach which will insure non-degradation of its groundwater. It also requires a compelling plan of action. We have prepared a plan of action for the four eastern towns of Brookhaven, Riverhead, Southampton and East Hampton, the county, including the Long Island Regional Planning Board and Suffolk County Water Authority, the state and the public. This plan includes acquisition and land use regulations to achieve this goal. It provides fo~ designatioa of growth areas as w~ll as preservation so that reasonable growth, as projected, may continue in a manner compatible with resource objectives. It suggests land use tools available to local units of government -- zoning, clustering and transfer of development credit strategies. It identifies sources of funds to attain this land use objective -- a water surcharge instituted by water suppliers, in particular the Suffolk County Water Authority and additional state and federal funds to be used as a source of capital to facilitate a transfer of development credit program. What is needed therefore is the political will with the requisite support of the citizenry which will benefit to implement this plan of action. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. If the ounce of prevention is to be available to us, we must act now. 37 GLOSSARY Aquifer: A geological formation which can hold and transmit water. Cluster development: The grouping of housing units together, rather than un~form distribution of units over an entire site. This process yields higher density in certain portions of the site, while preserving open space and natural features in other areas of the site. Critical ~roundwater watersheds: Undisturbed, naturally vegetated recharge areas which are of unusually great water supply and/or public health value, as may be determined by deep flow of groundwater or recharge of high quality water in large volumes with long residence time. Deep Flow Recharge Area: That part of the land surface through which vertical percolation to the deepest portions of the aqdifer takes place. Drawdown: The lowering of the water table due to overpumpage. Salt water intrusion is a corollary of drawdown in some cases. Fire Climax Species: A plant species which is capable of surviving multiple wildfires. Fire climax species have special adaptations such as thick bark or large underground root crowns. Pitch Pine and Scrub Oak are fire climax species found in abundance in the Long Island Pine Earrens. Groundwater: Water found underground which completely fills the open spaces between particles of sand, gravel, clay and silt. The zone of materials filled with groundwater is called the zone of saturation. Groundwater Mining: Extraction of groundwater at a rate whlch-~-~--'e-~e~d~s--~qt of natural recharge, causing lowering of the groundwater table. q. gn~ Island Pine Barrens: An interdependent landscape and forest ecosystem, the Pine Barrens are characterized by the conspicuous presence of Pitch Pine (Pinus ri~ida) , a variety of oaks including Scrub Oak (Quercus ilicifolia), and plants of the heath family. In li.ving association another, natural wildfires shape the plant community and create a mosaic of vegetational associations that occupy the central and southern portions 38 of the dry, sand-rich soils of Long Island's glacially-derived outwash plains and terminal moraines. Moraine: A geological feature created by glaciation. Moraines are formed when an ice sheet stagnates, depositing materials pushed by and 'carried by the glacier and forming a row of hills parallel to the wasting ice front. Non-degradation: A policy in water quality management in which ambient water quality is used to establish standards; non-degradation means maintenance of ambient water quality. Nutrient-poor, Nutrient-rich: In this context, nutrients are substances essential for plant growth, such as nitrogen, potassium, magnesium and phosphorus. Nutrient-rich water is undesirable, as high quantities of these elements can have negative health effects. Outwash Plain: A plain composed of earth material washed out from a glacier, generally with a very flat topography with slight variations in contour. Point source of contamination: A discrete source of groundwater contamination such as the effluent discharge from a sewage treatment plant. .An example of a non-point source, by contrast, is turf fertilizer spread over lawns, causing nitrate pollution. Recharge: The downward movement of moisture to the groundwater through the soil overlying the aquifer system. Residence Time: The length of time a given unit volume of water (including any contaminant in that water) is present in a hydrologic system. On Long Island residence time varies from a few days to thousands of years depending on where in the aquifer system recharge took place. Special protection area: Designation which would be established by the proposed Sole Source Aquifer Protection Act, delineating a recharge watershed area within a designated sole source area which is particularly critical for the maintenance of large volumes of high quality groundwater for long periods of time. Synthetic Organic Chemicals (SOC's): Compounds which are generally petroleum-derived, widely used in degreasers, dry-cleaning fluids, paint thinners, and many pesticides and herbicides. These can be toxic and/or carcinogenic. 39 Transfer of development rights or credits (TDR): A system designed to preserve open space and channel growth into designated areas. Under such a program, landowners in areas to be preserved sell their right to subdivide or develop their land in the future. The purchaser of development rights can use them to develop property at an increased density within a designated growth area. TDR programs can be facilitated through the establishment of a public land credit exchange institution. Upzonin~, Downzonin~: Upzoning is a reduction in the number of dwelling units permitted on a given unit of land, resulting in increased lot size. Conversely, downzoning allows for an increase in the number of dwelling units per given land area, and results in smaller lot size. Water Table: The upper surface of groundwater in the saturated zone of an aquifer system. The level of the water table fluctuates with varying rates of recharge and pu~npage. Watershed: An area where water drains into a specific basin or reservoir~ or, for groundwater, a region where water is abundantly recharged to the subsurface groundwater reservoir. 40 BIBLIOGRAPHY PERIODICALS The Heath Hen: Newsletter of the Long Island Pine Barrens Society. 1980- Long Island Pine Barrens Task Force (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation). Minutes. 1978- New York State Legislative Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long Island. Annual Report. 1981- Pine Barrens Planning Council (Long Island Regional Planning Board Minutes. 1981- BOOKS AND ARTICLES Allen, David Y. "Long Island's Fragile Pine Barrens," Sierra Atlantic (Sierra Club, New York State). (Fall, 1979), 4-5. Brookhaven, N.Y. The Brookhaven Master Plan. 1975. Burlington County, N.J. Board of Freeholders. The Burlington C.~qnty, New.Jersey, Pinelands Development Credit E_~xc_hange Board Procedural Guide. 1982. Cohen, Philip M. An Atlas of Long Island's Water Resources (New York Water Resources Commission Bulletin 62). 1968. Water for the Future of Long Island, New York (New York Water Resources Bulletin 62A). 1970. East Hampton, N.Y. Comprehensive Plan: Village of East Hampton. 1967. Town and Egginton, Joyce. (July, 1981), 84-93. "The Long Island Lesson," Audubon Englebright, Steven. "Long Island's Secret Wilderness," The Conservationist (Jan.-Feb., 1980) , 23-29. Forman, Richard T. T., ed. Pine Barrens: Ecosystem and Landscape. New York: Academic Press, 1979. Holzmacher, McLendon and Murrell. Report: 41 Comprehensive Public Wa~r York. 3 v. 1968-70. Supply Stqdy, Sqffolk .County, New Long Island Pine Barrens Task Force (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation). Findings and Recommendations of the L~on9 Island Pine Barren's Task Force: A Report to the State Commissioner of Environmental Conservation. 1981. Long Island Island Comprehensive Study). 1978. Regional Planning Board. The Lon9 Waste Treatment Management Plan (208 Murphy, Robert Cushman. Fish-Shape Paumanok. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1964. Public Nassau County, N.Y. Dept. of Health. Chemical Quality of Untreated Water S__qupply Wells in Nassau County. 1981. from Community New 3ersey Pinelands Commission. Comprehensive Management Plan for the Pinelands National Reserve. New Lisbon, N.J., 1980. New York Public Interest Research Group. Toxics on Tap: Chemical Contamination of Long Island Dr%nkin9 Water ~pplies. New York State Conservation Department. Division of Water Resources. Lon____q Island Water Resources. 1970. New York State Department of Health. Final Report of Island Ground Water Pollution Study. 1969. Padar, Francis, V. "Management of Long Island Aquifer Contamination by Organic Chemicals." Paper presented at annual meeting of the New York Water Pollution Control Association, January 19, 1981. Riverhead, N.Y. Comprehensive Master Plan of 1973. 1973. 5alzman, Eric. "Long Island Pine Barrens," Not Man A. part (Friends of the Earth). (June-July, 1978), 13. Long Island (April-Sept., "Some Notes on Breeding Birds in the Eastern --~ine Barrens," Linnean Society Newsletter 1977). Southampton, N.Y. Town of Southampton Master Plan. 42 1970. Tripp, James T.Bo and Jaffe, Adam B., "Preventing Groundwater Pollution: Toward a Coordiniated Strategy to Protect Critical Recharge Zones," The Harvard Environmental Law Review (1979), 1-47. U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Science and Technology and Environment. Proposed Legislation to Establish a Coastal Pine Barrens Reserve: Field Hearing. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1981. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Water Planning Division. Office of Solid Waste. Groundwater Protection. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1981. 43 The Coalition for the Protection of Long Island's Groundwater · Environmental Defense Fund · Friends of the Earth · Group for the South Fork, Inc. · Junior League of the North Shore · League of Women Voters - Nassau · League of Women Voters - Suffolk · Long Island Pine Barrens Society · New York State Legislative Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long Island · Nassau Council of Girl Scouts, Inc. · Museum of Long Island Natural Sciences - SUNY Stony Brook · SUNY, Old Westbury, Dr. Steve Pryor · Sierra Club - Long Island Group · Suffolk County Girl Scouts, Inc. and special thanks to · Long Island Foundation For additional copies of this report, please contact one of these organizations. This report was first released at a conference on October 2, 1982, entitled "Protecting Long Island's Grot~ndwater: Grassroots Strategies and Water- shed 'Planning." The conference was sponsored by the Coalition for the Protection of Long Island's Groundwater which has generously supported the printing of this report.