Watergate Wetlands Restoration Project Environmental Assessment June 20201_0004.pdf

Estimated Total Agency Costs Associated with

Developing and Producing This Environmental Assessment:

$49,977 i i

WATERGATE WETLANDS RESTORATION PROJECT

Environmental Assessment

This page intentionally left blank.

ii ii iii iii https://parkplanning.nps.gov/WatergateWetlandsRestoration https://parkplanning.nps.gov/WatergateWetlandsRestoration iv iv

Environmental Assessment

Table of Contents

1. Purpose of and Need for the Project

1.1 Purpose and Need

1.2 Project Background

1.3 History of the Site and Existing Conditions

2. Alternatives

2.1 No-Action

2.1 Proposed Action (preferred Alternative)

2.1.1 Actions to Restore at Least 33 Credit Acres of Wetlands

2.2 Mitigation Measures

2.2.1 Natural Resource Mitigation Measures

2.2.2 Cultural Resource Mitigation Measures

2.2.3 Visitor Use and Experience Mitigation Measures

3. Environmental Impacts

3.1 Issues and Impact Topics

3.1.1 Issue Retained for Detailed Analysis

3.1.2 Impact Topics Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis

3.2 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

3.2.1 Impacts to Historic Structures and Districts

3.2.2 Cumulative Impacts

4: Consultation and Coordination

5: Definitions

5.1 Acronyms

5.2 Glossary

6: References

Appendix A: Detailed Maps

Appendix B: Photos

Appendix C: Draft Memorandum of Agreement v v

Environmental Assessment

List of Tables

Table 1: Calculation of Credit Acres Required for Compensatory Mitigation, per the Wetlands SOF

Table 3: List of Agencies and Organizations Consulted

List of Figures

Figure 1: Project Location Map Figure 2: Current conditions and existing features at the project site Figure 3: Current conditions and existing features at the project site Figure 4: Proposed Action Figure 5: Proposed Action

Appendix A, Figure 1: Existing wetlands within the project area Appendix A, Figure 2: 1874 map, with an overlay of current features in the project area Appendix A, Figure 3: Aerial photo from 1930, with an overlay of current features in the project area Appendix A, Figure 4: Aerial photo from 1970, showing the change from agricultural use to recreational use Appendix A, Figure 5: Watergate Recreation Site, present-day aerial photo Appendix A, Figure 6: Map of locations where soil/rock spoils and salvaged fish would be placed file:///C:/Users/kboscheinen/Documents/Mitigation/Wetlands/_Watergate/Watergate_NEPA/EA/Watergate%20EA%20v.3/Watergate%20Wetlands%20Restoration%20Project%20Environmental%20Assessment%20June%202020.docx%23_Toc41490860 file:///C:/Users/kboscheinen/Documents/Mitigation/Wetlands/_Watergate/Watergate_NEPA/EA/Watergate%20EA%20v.3/Watergate%20Wetlands%20Restoration%20Project%20Environmental%20Assessment%20June%202020.docx%23_Toc41490861 file:///C:/Users/kboscheinen/Documents/Mitigation/Wetlands/_Watergate/Watergate_NEPA/EA/Watergate%20EA%20v.3/Watergate%20Wetlands%20Restoration%20Project%20Environmental%20Assessment%20June%202020.docx%23_Toc41490862 file:///C:/Users/kboscheinen/Documents/Mitigation/Wetlands/_Watergate/Watergate_NEPA/EA/Watergate%20EA%20v.3/Watergate%20Wetlands%20Restoration%20Project%20Environmental%20Assessment%20June%202020.docx%23_Toc41490863 file:///C:/Users/kboscheinen/Documents/Mitigation/Wetlands/_Watergate/Watergate_NEPA/EA/Watergate%20EA%20v.3/Watergate%20Wetlands%20Restoration%20Project%20Environmental%20Assessment%20June%202020.docx%23_Toc41490864 file:///C:/Users/kboscheinen/Documents/Mitigation/Wetlands/_Watergate/Watergate_NEPA/EA/Watergate%20EA%20v.3/Watergate%20Wetlands%20Restoration%20Project%20Environmental%20Assessment%20June%202020.docx%23_Toc41490870

1. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PROJECT

1.1 PURPOSE AND NEED

1.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND

1 Director’s Order 77-1, Wetland Protection

Table 1: Calculation of Credit Acres Required for Compensatory Mitigation, per the Wetlands SOF

Treatment Type Ratio (Treatment Area : Credit Acres)

Wetlands Restoration 1 acre : 1 acre

Stream Restoration 500 linear feet : 1 acre

Invasive Plant Treatment 10 acres : 1 acres

1.3 HISTORY OF THE SITE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS

Figure 1: Project Location Map

Figure 2: Current conditions and existing features at the project site

Figure 3: Current conditions and existing features at the project site

2. ALTERNATIVES

The alternatives evaluated in this EA were developed as a result of internal scoping, a focused discussion with park stakeholders, and interagency consultation. The NPS carried forward two alternatives for detailed evaluation: a no-action alternative, which is a continuation of current management conditions, and an action alternative which would satisfy the purpose and need for the project. See Section 5.2 for a glossary of terms.

2.1 NO-ACTION

2.1 PROPOSED ACTION (PREFERRED

ALTERNATIVE)

2.1.1 Actions to Restore at Least 33 Credit Acres of

Wetlands

Credit Acres

20 acres

9.4 acres

5.8 acres o o

2 The acreages of each type of wetlands may change as the project is constructed depending on nuances with soil and hydrology, but the total would remain at around 20 acres.

Figure 4: Proposed Action

Figure 5: Proposed Action

2.2 MITIGATION MEASURES

2.2.1 Natural Resource Mitigation Measures

3 Therefore, when combined with the restrictions for herpetofauna in hibernation, the in-stream work restriction period would be September 15-March 31.

2.2.2 Cultural Resource Mitigation Measures

2.2.3 Visitor Use and Experience Mitigation Measures

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 ISSUES AND IMPACT TOPICS

3.1.1 Issue Retained for Detailed Analysis

3.1.2 Impact Topics Considered but Eliminated from Detailed

Analysis

3.2 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

3.2.1 Impacts to Historic Structures and Districts

Affected Environment

Environmental Consequences

3.2.2 Cumulative Impacts

Methodology for Analyzing Cumulative Impacts

No-Action

Proposed Action

4 There are over 700 buildings in the park, including both historic and non-historic buildings.

4: CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

This section summarizes the agency consultation and coordination and public involvement that occurred during the preparation of this environmental assessment.

Table 3: List of Agencies and Organizations Consulted

Law, Statute or

Authority Regulated Resource Agency Permit, Review, or Consultation

Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water

Act, EO 11190 and

EO 11198

Freshwater wetlands and floodplains

New Jersey

Department of

Environmental

Protection (NJDEP)

NJDEP has delegated authority from the

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to implement Sections 401 and 404 on projects in their state. The NPS is applying for permits under the state’s

Freshwater Wetlands Protection Act

Rules at N.J.A.C. 7:7A and Flood Hazard

Area Control Act N.J.S.A. 7:13

Section 401 of the

Clean Water Act

Erosion and

Sedimentation

Warren County

Conservation District

A soil erosion and sedimentation control plan has been prepared under standards of NJ Soil Erosion and Sediment Control

Act, Ch 251, P.L. 1975

Section 7 of the

Endangered Species

Act

Federally-listed threatened and endangered species

U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service

Consultation in 2015 and 2020 determined that effects to listed species would be fully mitigated through timing restrictions and best management practices. No further consultation or permitting is necessary.

NJ Permanent Statue

Title 23

Fish New Jersey Division of

Fish and Wildlife

A fish salvage plan for when the ponds and stream are dewatered is being developed in consultation with the state.

NJ Permanent Statue

Title 23

State-listed threatened and endangered species

NJDEP Mitigations to avoid and minimize take of protected species are being developed in consultation with the state.

Section 106 of the

National Historic

Preservation Act

Cultural resources NJDEP, Advisory

Council on Historic

Preservation, the

Delaware Nation, Delaware Tribe, the

Stockbridge-Munsee

Community

Consultation regarding impacts to archeological and aboveground resources.

The following interest groups, stakeholders, and agencies were contacted to participate in a NEPA focus group meeting held on May 21, 2016 during the proposed project’s pre-planning period:

• Appalachian Mountain Club – Mohican Outdoor Center

• Appalachian Trail Conservancy

• Camp No-Be-Bos-Co

• Delaware River Fishermen’s Association

• Delaware Riverkeeper Network

• Friends of Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area

• Hardwick Township

• Millbrook Village Society

• New Jersey Anglers Club

• New Jersey Natural Land Trust

• New York/New Jersey Trails Conference

• NJ State Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs

• Pocono Environmental Education Center

• The Nature Conservancy – NJ Field Office

• Trout Unlimited, North Jersey Chapter

• Warren County

• Worthington State Forest

5: DEFINITIONS

5.1 ACRONYMS

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

DBH diameter at breast height

DO Director’s Order

EA Environmental Assessment

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EJ Environmental Justice

EO Executive Order

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

HPPS Historic Properties Prioritization Strategy

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

NJDEP New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

NJHPO New Jersey Historic Preservation Office/Officer

NPS National Park Service

NRHP National Register of Historic Places

NWI National Wetlands Inventory

PPL PPL Electric Utilities Corporation

PSE&G Public Service Electric and Gas Company

ROD Record of Decision

SOF Statement of Findings

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

5.2 GLOSSARY

Armoring (of stream bank)

Reinforcement of a streambank with protective covering, such as boulders, root wads, and vegetation; or engineered materials (such as erosion control blankets, riprap, and gabion baskets) in order to reduce bank cutting and erosion due to peak flows.

Consultation Coordination, cooperation, and seeking concurrence with other federal, state, local, and tribal governments concerning actions and environmental impacts within the jurisdictions of, or of interest to those organizations.

Credit acre A credit acre is a measure of ecological uplift that results from restoration work. For this project, a credit acre includes not just the restoration of wetlands themselves but also the restoration of other parts of the ecosystem that support wetlands such as the restoration of a stream, its floodplain, and native vegetation.

Cumulative impact The incremental environmental impact of the an action, when added to the impacts of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions.

Dewatering Removal of surface water (in the ponds and sections of the stream channel during work) by draining or pumping.

Ecological uplift An improvement in the functionality of interactions between organisms and their environment, be it either individually or collectively within an ecosystem for a given area.

Ecosystem The complex of living organisms, their physical environment, and all their interrelationships in a particular area.

Emergent Wetland Wetlands characterized by erect, rooted, herbaceous (non-woody) hydrophytes, excluding mosses and lichens. This vegetation is present for most of the growing season in most years. These wetlands are usually dominated by perennial plants, including grasses and sedges.

Erosion The action of water, wind, or other natural processes that removes soil, rock, or other material from one location and transports it to another location.

Floodplain The lowland that borders a stream or river, usually dry but subject to flooding.

Forested wetland A palustrine wetland is dominated by woody vegetation that is 6 m

(19.6 feet) tall or taller.

Hydrology The movement, distribution and management of water, including the water cycle, water resources and environmental watershed sustainability.

Hydraulics The mechanics of the flow and its effect on bed, banks, and structures.

Impact topics Headings used in this document that represent specific resources that would be affected by the proposed action or consequences of not taking action.

Invasive species A non-native organism whose introduction causes or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm, or harm to human, animal, or plant health

Issues Problems, concerns, conflicts, obstacles, or benefits that would result if the proposed action is implemented or if no action is taken

(the current conditions continue).

Mitigate/Mitigation Actions taken to avoid an impact altogether, minimize the degree or magnitude of the impact, reduce the impact over time, rectify the impact, or compensate for the impact.

Non-native species Non-native species are those that have occurred outside of their natural range. That natural range could be as far as another country or as near as a different region of the same country. Unlike invasive species, non-native species may not hinder or prevent the survival of others within the ecosystem. They simply exist where they have not naturally occurred.

Palustrine wetland Palustrine systems include all nontidal wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent grasses, emergent mosses or lichens. This type of wetland encompasses most wetlands also referred to as marshes, swamps, bogs, fens.

Peak flow The maximum rate of discharge during the period of runoff caused by a storm.

Scrub-shrub wetland A palustrine wetland dominated by woody vegetation less than 6 meters (19.6 feet) tall.

Salvage (of fish) Capturing fish through means such as electroshocking or netting, and (for this project) transporting them to a different location.

Scouring Mobilization/fluctuations in the vertical position of the bed of a stream as material is eroded and degrades.

Seasonal restrictions Restrictions on the time of year that certain types of construction can occur, in order to protect certain species from direct or indirect harm.

Sedimentation Loose sand, silt, clay, and other materials that become suspended in water and either transported to a different location (via a stream) or settle to the bottom (such as in a pond).

Spoils Material, such as soil and rock, that is excavated during grading work and is excess to the needs of the project and (in this project) taken offsite.

Staging area An area during construction that is used for the storage of construction-related equipment and materials such as vehicles and stockpiles.

Wetland An area that has one or more of the following three attributes:

1. at least periodically, the land supports predominantly hydrophytes (wetland vegetation);

2. the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil; or

3. the substrate is non-soil and is saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing season of each year.

6: REFERENCES

Bodle, Wayne K.

1977 “Old Mine Road Historic District,” National Register of Historic Places Inventory –

Nomination Form. National Park Service. Prepared 4/22/77, maps revised 7/10/80. Listed

12/3/80.

Coastal Resources, Inc. (CRI)

2016 Watergate Restoration Project: Aquatic Macroinvertebrates and Fisheries Report. Prepared for the National Park Service. August 2016.

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)

2005 Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental

Policy Act. Reprint. 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508.

2016 Final Guidance for Federal Departments and Agencies on Consideration of Greenhouse

Gas Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change in National Environmental Policy Act

Reviews. Washington, DC.

Cowardin, Lewis M., Virginia Carter, Francis C. Golet, and Edward T. LaRoe

1979 Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service. Publication FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. December.

EcolSciences, Inc.

2010 Vernal Habitat Survey Results for PSEG Roseland-Bushkill Transmission Line Right-of-Way

Proposed Access Roads Delaware Water Gap National Recreational Area Warren County, New Jersey. Prepared for PSEG Service Corporation. February 2010.

E2 Project Management, LLC (E2PM)

2014 Supplemental Phase IB Archeological Survey Susquehanna to Roseland 500kV

Transmission Project, Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, Hardwick Township, Warren County, New Jersey. NPS Ref: SRLINE 25147; NJHPO#: 08 1556. Prepared for

Public Service Electric & Gas Company and PPL Electric Utilities Corporation.

Faulk, Evan. A.

2015 Patterns in distribution of stream fishes in the Eastern Rivers and Mountains Network: A multi-species occupancy approach. Thesis. The Pennsylvania State University, University

Park, Pennsylvania.

Hallo, Jeff

2017 Hallo, J., J. Fefer, G. Riungu. Social Science Research to Support Visitor Use Management at Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area: A Report on Two Phases of Visitor-Based

Data Collection. On file at park headquarters. 2017.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

1988 Visual Impact Assessment for Highway Projects. Publication No. FHWA-HI-88-054.

2015 Guidelines for the Visual Impact Assessment of Highway Projects. Publication No. FHWA-

HEP-15-029. https://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/guidebook/ documents/VIA_Guidelines_for_Highway_Projects.asp. January 2015.

Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation

1989 Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, and U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Cooperative technical publication. 76 pp. plus appendices.

Gonzalez, Patrick

2016 Climate Change Trends, Vulnerabilities, and Hydrology in Delaware Water Gap National

Recreation Area, USA. National Park Service Climate Change Response Program. Berkeley, CA.

Gunderson, Jeffrey L.

2008 Rusty Crayfish: A Nasty Invader – Biology, Identification and Impacts. Minnesota Sea

Grant, Duluth, Minnesota. http://www.seagrant.umn.edu/ais/rustycrayfish_invader.

Hilgartner, William B., and Grace S. Brush

2006 Prehistoric Habitat Stability and Post-Settlement Habitat Change in a Chesapeake Bay

Freshwater Tidal Wetland, USA. The Holocene 16, no. 4 (2006): 479-494. doi:

10.1191/0959683606hl938rp. May 2006.

Johnson, Mirmiran & Thompson (JMT)

2017a Forest Report: Watergate, Delaware Water Gap, Warren County, New Jersey. Prepared for the National Park Service. September 2017.

2017b Wetland Report: Watergate, Delaware Water Gap, Warren County, New Jersey. Prepared for the National Park Service. October 2017.

2017c Phase IA Cultural Resource Report: Watergate Wetland and Floodplain Restoration Project, Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. Warren County, New Jersey. Prepared for the National Park Service. March 2017.

2018 Concept Design Feasibility Study: Watergate Recreation Site, Delaware Water Gap

National Recreation Area. Prepared for the National Park Service. November 2018.

National Park Service (NPS)

1974 National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form for Old Mine Road Historic District.

Prepared by the National Park Service. May 8, 1974. (See also Bodle, Wayne K.)

1975 National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form for Millbrook Village Historic District.

Prepared by the National Park Service. 1975.

1994 Protecting Cultural Landscapes: Planning, Treatment and Management of Historic

Landscapes. National Register Preservation Brief #36. Written by Charles A. Birnbaum for the National Park Service. https://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs/36-cultural-landscapes.htm#top.

2002 Director’s Order #77-1: Wetland Protection.

2003 Director’s Order #77-2: Floodplain Management.

2006 Management Policies 2006. Policies to guide the management of the national park system.

ISBN 0-16-076874-8.

2011 Director’s Order #12: Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision-

Making.

2012a Abandoned Mineral Lands Inventory and Assessment—Delaware Water Gap National

Recreation Area. Prepared by CALIBRE Systems Inc. for the National Park Service.

June 2012.

2012b Susquehanna to Roseland 500-kV Transmission Line Right-of-Way and https://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs/36-cultural-landscapes.htm#top https://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs/36-cultural-landscapes.htm#top

Special Use Permit Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Appalachian National

Scenic Trail (APPA), Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, and Middle Delaware

National Scenic and Recreational River (MDSR), Pennsylvania and New Jersey. National

Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. August 2012.

2012c Final Statement of Findings for Executive Order 11990, "Protection of Wetlands" And

Executive Order 11988, "Floodplain Management," Susquehanna to Roseland 500kV

Transmission Line Right-Of-Way and Special Use Permit Environmental Impact Statement, Appalachian National Scenic Trail, Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, Middle

Delaware National Scenic and Recreational River, Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

September 2012.

2015a Director’s Order 12: (NEPA) Handbook.

2015b Letter from NPS to USFWS New Jersey Field Office initiating informal Section 7 consultation in connection with the Watergate project. Dated January 29, 2015.

2015c Routine Integrated Pest Management Strategies Including the Use of Pesticides at

Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. Programmatic document that enables the use of pesticides (including herbicides) for routine treatment of park facilities and natural areas with approved chemical products under the appropriate authorities, legal requirements, and policies. Dated January 28, 2015.

2016a Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation (LSAMP)/NSSA Project: Surveys for invasive Rusty Crayfish (Orconectes rusticus) at Delaware Water Gap National Recreation

Area. Dated February 17, 2016.

2016b National Park Service Procedural Manual #77-1: Wetland Protection.

2016c Letter from NPS to New Jersey Historic Preservation Office (NJHPO) with updated

Determinations of Eligibility (DOEs) for Old Mine Road Historic District (OMRHD). NPS determined the two privies at Millbrook School were noncontributing resources to OMRHD.

Dated December 22, 2016.

2017 List of Properties and Buildings Included in the Historic Properties Prioritization Strategy

(formerly Historic Properties Management Plan). Dated March 2, 2017.

2018 List of Historic and Non-Historic Buildings in Millbrook Village. Dated June 20, 2018.

2020a Watergate Wetlands Restoration Project: Visual Analysis of the Proposed Utility Line

Relocation within Old Mine Road and Millbrook Village Historic Districts. PDF presentation.

Author: Kristy Boscheinen. Dated February 25, 2020.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP)

2013 Protocols for the establishment of exceptional resource value wetlands pursuant to the

Freshwater Wetlands Protection Act (N.J.S.A. 13:9B-1 et seq.) based on documentation of state of federal endangered or threatened species. NJDEP, Division of Land Use

Regulation, Office of Natural Lands Management, and Endangered and Nongame Species

Program. Trenton, New Jersey. pp. 222.

2016a Species Status Review of Amphibian and Reptiles. Final Report including review by the NJ

Endangered and Nongame Species Advisory Committee conducted on January 7, 2016.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Endangered and Nongame Species Program.

2020a Letter from NJHPO to NPS regarding December 22, 2016 letter with updated DOEs.

NJHPO did not concur with NPS that the two privies at Millbrook School were noncontributing to OMRHD. Dated February 25, 2020.

2020b Email correspondence from NJDEP regarding recommendations from the pre-application site visit on January 30, 2020. Dated March 3, 2020.

2020c NJ Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual.

https://www.njstormwater.org/bmp_manual2.htm Dated March 2020; accessed May 22, 2020.

Perles, S. J., G. S. Podniesinski, E. Eastman, L. A. Sneddon, and S. C. Gawler.

2007 Classification and Mapping of Vegetation and Fire Fuel Models at Delaware Water Gap

National Recreation Area: Volumes 1 and 2. Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR—2007/076.

National Park Service. Philadelphia, PA.

Sharpe, Peter, and Kevin Noon

2014 Memorandum to Superintendent, Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, entitled

“Report for Travel to Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, May 12 through 15, 2014 – SRLine Wetland Compensation Project Review”: June 25, 2014. L54(2380). National

Park Service, Water Resources Division, Fort Collins, Colorado, 10 pp.

Sullivan, Robert, and Mark Meyer

2014 Guide to evaluating visual impact assessments for renewable energy projects.

https://www.njstormwater.org/bmp_manual2.htm

Natural Resources Report NPS/ARD/NRR—2014/836. National Park Service. Fort Collins, Colorado.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)

2012 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual:

Northcentral and Northeast Region (Version 2.0), Environmental Laboratory, ERDC/EL TR-

12-1. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. January

2012.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)

2000 Principles for the Ecological Restoration of Aquatic Resources. EPA841-F-00-003. Office of

Water (4501F), United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. 4 pp.

2008 Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in

Rapanos v. United States & Carabell v. United States. December 2, 2008.

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-02/documents/cwa_jurisdiction

_following_rapanos120208.pdf

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)

2015 Letter from the USFWS New Jersey Field Office to NPS in response to informal Section 7 consultation request. Dated April 16, 2015.

2016a Migratory Bird Program. Conserving America’s Birds. Accessed September 23, 2016.

https://www.fws.gov/birds/index.php

2016b National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife

Service, Washington, D.C. http://fws.gov/wetlands/.

2017 Pollock, M.M., G.M. Lewallen, K. Woodruff, C.E. Jordan and J.M. Castro (Editors) 2017. The

Beaver Restoration Guidebook: Working with Beaver to Restore Streams, Wetlands, and

Floodplains. Version 2.0. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 219 pp.

Online at: https://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo/promo.cfm?id=177175812

2020 Letter from the USFWS New Jersey Field Office to NPS in response to informal Section 7 consultation request. Dated February 25, 2020.

https://www.fws.gov/birds/index.php http://fws.gov/wetlands/ https://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo/promo.cfm?id=177175812

U.S. Forest Service (USFS)

2019 Wohl, Ellen; Scott, Daniel N.; Yochum, Steven E. 2019. Managing for large wood and beaver dams in stream corridors. Gen. Tech. Rep. 404. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Walter, Robert C., and Dorothy. J. Merritts

2008 Natural Streams and the Legacy of Water-Powered Mills. Science 319 (5861): 299–304.

doi:10.1126/science.1151716. January 18, 2008.

WSP USA Inc. (WSP)

2020a Sheridan, Kevin, and Courselle, Amber. Cultural Resources Report, Monitoring Plan, and

Mitigation Plan for the Watergate Wetlands Restoration Project, Delaware Water Gap

National Recreation Area. Prepared on behalf of the National Park Service. May 2020.

2020b Watergate Wetlands Restoration Project: Basis of Design Report. Prepared on behalf of the

National Park Service. May 2020

2020c Watergate Wetlands Restoration Project: Evolution of Planned Wetlands Report Prepared on behalf of the National Park Service. May 2020.

2020d Watergate Wetlands Restoration Project: Hydrologic and Hydraulic Assessment Report.

Prepared on behalf of the National Park Service. May 2020.

2020e Watergate Wetlands Restoration Project: Invasive Plant Species Treatment Plan. . Prepared on behalf of the National Park Service. May 2020.

2020f Watergate Wetlands Restoration Project: Reference Site and Reference Reach Report.

Prepared on behalf of the National Park Service. May 2020.

2020g Watergate Wetlands Restoration Project: Wetlands Delineation Report. Prepared on behalf of the National Park Service. May 2020.

APPENDIX A: DETAILED MAPS

Appendix A, Figure 1: Existing wetlands within the project area

There are three types of wetlands present onsite, but all are poor- to medium-quality.

This project would restore 20 acres of medium- to high-quality wetlands.

Appendix A, Figure 2: 1874 map, with an overlay of current features in the project area.

The black-and-white map was produced in 1874. It shows the previous location of Van Campens Brook (single black line), the location of the Columbia-Walpack Turnpike (double black line), and only one pond within the project area, which was associated with the “old Tannery.” The current features are overlaid in color, including paved roads

(peach color) ponds and streams (in blue), current location of the Columbia-Walpack Turnpike (white-and-pink) line, and buildings (orange squares). Old Mine Road was in a different location at the time, to the west of the area shown on this map. Note that Van Campens Brook used to pass through the area where the largest pond now is. Its current alignment is to the south of its original alignment.

Appendix A, Figure 3: Aerial photo from 1930, with an overlay of current features in the project area.

This aerial photo from 1930 highlights the use of the project area as agricultural land. Van Campens Brook, which in the Figure 2 map had been running through where the largest pond now is, has been moved to its current position

(south of where it was previously). The Susquehanna-Roseland Transmission Line right-of-way, constructed in 1929, is evident as the cleared area running diagonally across the lower left of the photo. The Columbia-Walpack Turnpike is the sinuous lighter-colored line that runs diagonally through the photo from lower left to upper right. Old Mine

Road had not been built in its current alignment yet, but was constructed later in the 1930s. The current features are overlaid in color, including Old Mine Road (peach color) ponds and streams (in blue), and buildings (in orange).

Appendix A, Figure 4: Aerial photo from 1970, showing the change from agricultural use to recreational use.

This aerial photo from 1970 shows that a transition in land use has occurred from agricultural to recreational

(vacation homes and properties). The agricultural fields are mostly gone, and the property owners have excavated the largest pond, dammed Van Campens Brook to create smaller ponds, and created a large mowed/maintained landscape. The Susquehanna-Roseland Transmission Line right-of-way is evident as the cleared area running diagonally across the lower third of the photo. The Columbia-Walpack Turnpike is still present, shown in the middle of the photo, but its alignment and characteristics have changed—it is no longer the main travel route through the valley, because Old Mine Road (top third of photo) has been built in its current alignment.

Appendix A, Figure 5: Watergate Recreation Site, present-day aerial photo

This 2019 aerial photograph shows conditions at the present-day Watergate Recreation Site. Some of the smaller ponds on Van Campens Brook have been lost to flooding. Some of the mowed/maintained landscape seen in the

1970 photo continued to be maintained as such since federal acquisition of the property around 1980, and is currently used as a picnic area. The houses and driveways were removed, and a parking lot and restroom building were added.

Excess soil and rock (spoils) from the project would be trucked 2 miles to the north and used to fill in an abandoned quarry (Quarry Site AA). Salvaged fish would be trucked to the nearest location within the watershed that would not adversely affect native aquatic fauna—most likely, Poxono Boat Launch on the Delaware River, 3.5 miles south of the project area.

Appendix A, Figure 6: Map of locations where soil/rock spoils and salvaged fish would be placed.

APPENDIX B: PHOTOS

Photo Key

Photo 1: Overview of main area of Watergate Recreation Site. Photo taken from septic mound.

Note picnic tables, large mowed lawn, and pond. The Susquehanna- Roseland Transmission Line is in the background.

The lawn and pond would be converted into wetlands.

Photo 2: The restroom building and one of the concrete staircases, just below the parking lot.

These features would remain unchanged.

Photo 3: Looking back towards the Watergate Recreation Site (center left of photo), standing on earthen dam of largest pond. Van Campens Brook is to the right of the dam.

The pond would be dewatered prior to removal of the dam. The pond and dam would be converted to wetlands, and would be at the same elevation as Van

Campens Brook in order to restore the floodplain.

Photo 4: The second-largest pond in the project area in July 2020. The utility line that would be relocated is visible above the pond.

The pond would be dewatered prior to the removal of the earthen dam (left side of photo), and the area restored as wetlands.

Photo 5: The low, earthen dam that forms the second-largest pond.

This would be removed and the area restored as wetlands.

Photo 6: The small pond just to the south of the second-largest pond.

This area would be graded to restore wetlands.

Photo 7: The Columbia- Walpack Turnpike. A channel of Van Campens Brook is just to the right of the road, and a wetland is just to the left of the road.

The road acts as a levee.

Removing it and restoring natural grades would reconnect Van Campens Brook with its floodplain (including the wetland).

Photo 8: The Columbia- Walpack Turnpike on the right, and Van Campens Brook on the left. The stream frequently avulses (jumps its banks) after rainfall in this section, eroding the roadbed.

This section of road would be removed.

Doing so would allow the stream to function properly; it would be reconnected with its floodplain and the energy of flood flows would be able to dissipate more than at present.

Photo 9: The Columbia-

Walpack Turnpike. Van

Campens Brook is to the right and behind the non-native shrubs. The stream frequently avulses

(jumps its banks) after rainfall in this section, eroding the roadbed and leaving behind cobble.

This section of road would be removed. Doing so would allow the stream to function properly; it would be reconnected with its floodplain and the energy of flood flows would be able to dissipate more than at present.

Photo 10: Silvie Meadow. This field is mowed and used as overflow parking for two events at Millbrook Village per year. The meadow would be used as a staging area during construction and closed to visitors. Overflow parking is available at several other locations nearby, so its closure would have no effect to visitors.

Photo 11: Millbrook School. Due in part to its remote location and difficulty in patrolling the area, the school has been vandalized. It is no longer accessible by road from Millbrook Village— access was via the Columbia-Walpack Turnpike, which (as shown above) was heavily damaged by flooding.

A road, dating from 1860 or older, would be re-established between the school and Old Mine

Road to allow for administrative vehicle access. A hiking trail would be established from Millbrook Village to the school.

Photo 12: Millbrook Cemetery, a private inholding adjacent to the project area. Note Garis Barn in the background.

Photo 13: The path from Millbrook School to Millbrook Cemetery. Note Millbrook School in the background.

Photo 14: Garis Barn, north façade. Note collapsed (modern) lean-to. The barn is in the Van Campens Brook floodplain.

Removing the first-floor exterior clapboard siding would allow floodwaters to flow through the building, rather than against it.

This will allow for the long-term preservation of the building in its current location.

Photo 15: The Columbia- Walpack Turnpike near Garis Barn. It was damaged during flood events from 2004-2011 and has become impassable to most park visitors. As in the photo above, the road is between Van Campens Brook and a wetland.

Removing this section of road would reconnect Van Campens Brook with its floodplain (including the wetland).

Undated photo

(1970s-

1980s)

Photo 16 (series of 4 photos): Original condition of barn (note lack of lean-to and pond) and damage following two flood events. In the photo labeled 2011a, note cobble piled up against the north façade of the barn from the flood event in Van Campens Brook.

2011b 2011a

Photo 18: Remnants of a dam in Van Campens Brook.

The dam still constrains the brook, preventing the stream’s hydraulics from functioning naturally.

This concrete dam remnant would be removed.

Photo 17: Mass wasting of a bank on Van Campens Brook within the Susquehanna- Roseland Transmission Line right-of-way.

This bank would be armored (stabilized) to prevent the stream from cutting further into the right-of-way, which would reduce erosion, prevent habitat loss for state-listed species, and allow vegetation to re-grow which would provide shade over the stream and reduce its temperature.

Photo 19: Another example of remnants of a concrete dam in Van Campens Brook.

The dam still constrains the brook, preventing the stream’s hydraulics from functioning naturally.

This concrete dam remnant would be removed.

Photo 20: Mass wasting of a bank (right side of photo) upstream of the dam in the above photo.

This bank would be stabilized, which would reduce erosion, prevent habitat loss for state-listed species, and allow vegetation to re-grow which would provide shade over the stream and reduce its temperature.

APPENDIX C: DRAFT MEMORANDUM OF

AGREEMENT

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

BETWEEN

DELAWARE WATER GAP NATIONAL RECREATION AREA

AND THE

NEW JERSEY HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE

REGARDING THE WATERGATE WETLANDS RESTORATION PROJECT

HARDWICK TOWNSHIP, WARREN COUNTY, NEW JERSEY

WHEREAS the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area (“the park”) proposes to restore wetlands and the natural function of a stream and its floodplain by removing man-made dams, levees, impoundments, a road, and a portion of a building; and re-grading the site to restore wetlands and proper stream and floodplain function; and

WHEREAS, the park has defined the undertaking's area of potential effect (APE) as an area of 114 acres within and near the Watergate Recreation Site (see map, Attachment A); and

WHEREAS the park has determined that the undertaking may have an adverse effect due to impacts to the Millbrook School property, which is listed in the National Register of Historic

Places as a contributing resource to Old Mine Road Historic District; and to the Garis Barn and the Columbia-Walpack Turnpike, which are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic

Places, and has consulted with the New Jersey Historic Preservation Officer pursuant to 36 C.F.R.

part 800, of the regulations implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act

(16 U.S.C. § 470f); and

NOW, THEREFORE, the park and the New Jersey Historic Preservation Office (HPO) agree that the undertaking shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take into account the effect of the undertaking on historic properties.

STIPULATIONS

The park shall ensure that the following measures are carried out:

I. A hiking trail between Millbrook Village and Millbrook School would be established to restore pedestrian access for visitors.

II. A road between Millbrook School and Old Mine Road, constructed prior to 1860 but unused for decades, would be put back into use in order to restore vehicular access that would be used for special circumstances, such as preservation maintenance campaigns.

III. The alignment, dimensions, and roadbed material profile of the Columbia-Walpack

Turnpike would be documented prior to its removal.

IV. Photographic and/or video documentation of the exterior and interior of the Garis Barn would be completed prior to construction and made available to the public.

V. The lower 6-10’ of exterior wooden clapboards would be removed from the Garis Barn in order to would allow floodwater to flow through, not against, the Garis Barn, enabling the building to be preserved in place, rather than demolished by floods, demolished by the NPS, or relocated to a different site.

a. Exterior wooden clapboards would be preserved/accessioned and could be reinstalled if circumstances allow.

b. The collapsing lean-to, a modern (1980s) addition, would be removed.

IV. DURATION

This MOA will expire if its terms are not carried out within three (3) years from the date of its execution. Prior to such time, the park may consult with the other signatories to reconsider the terms of the MOA and amend it in accordance with Stipulation VIII below.

VI. MONITORING AND REPORTING

Within three (3) years following the execution of this MOA until it expires or is terminated, the park shall provide the HPO a summary report detailing work undertaken pursuant to its terms.

VII. DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Should any signatory or concurring party to this MOA object at any time to any actions proposed or the manner in which the terms of this MOA are implemented, the park shall consult with such party to resolve the objection. If the park determines that such objection cannot be resolved, the park will:

A. Forward all documentation relevant to the dispute, including the park’s proposed resolution, to the ACHP. The ACHP shall provide the park with its advice on the resolution of the objection within thirty (30) days of receiving adequate documentation. Prior to reaching a final decision on the dispute, the park shall prepare a written response that takes into account any timely advice or comments regarding the dispute from the ACHP, signatories and concurring parties, and provide them with a copy of this written response.

the park will then proceed according to its final decision.

B. If the ACHP does not provide its advice regarding the dispute within the thirty (30) day time period, the park may make a final decision on the dispute and proceed accordingly.

Prior to reaching such a final decision, the park shall prepare a written response that takes into account any timely comments regarding the dispute from the signatories and concurring parties to the MOA, and provide them and the ACHP with a copy of such written response.

C. The park's responsibility to carry out all other actions subject to the terms of this MOA that are not the subject of the dispute remain unchanged.

VIII. AMENDMENTS

This MOA may be amended when such an amendment is agreed to in writing by all signatories.

The amendment will be effective on the date a copy signed by all of the signatories is filed with the ACHP.

IX. TERMINATION

If any signatory to this MOA determines that its terms will not or cannot be carried out, that party shall immediately consult with the other parties to attempt to develop an amendment per

Stipulation VIII, above. If within thirty (30) days an amendment cannot be reached, any signatory may terminate the MOA upon written notification to the other signatories.

Once the MOA is terminated, and prior to work continuing on the undertaking, the park must either

(a) execute a MOA pursuant to 36 CFR § 800.6 or (b) request, take into account, and respond to the comments of the ACHP under 36 CFR § 800.7. The park shall notify the signatories as to the course of action it will pursue.

X. ANTI-DEFICIENCY

All actions taken by the park in accordance with this MOA are subject to the availability of funds, and nothing in this MOA shall be interpreted as constituting a violation of the Anti-Deficiency

Act.

Execution of this MOA by the park and HPO and implementation of its terms evidence that the park has taken into account the effects of this undertaking on historic properties and afforded the

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation an opportunity to comment.

SIGNATORIES:

Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area

Date

Sula Jacobs, Superintendent

New Jersey Historic Preservation Office

Date

Catherine McCabe, Historic Preservation Officer