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.