In its attempt to protectdrinking water for

9 million New Yorkers,the New York City

Department ofEnvironmental Protection

presents a discussiondraft of new regulations

to upstate watershedcommunities, includingrequirements that affect

agriculture and put the livelihood of farmers

at risk.

1990

Con

flic

t

With The Green Book ofpolicy recommendations,the Watershed Forestry

Task Force lays out a blueprint for the

Watershed ForestryProgram, promoting bestmanagement practices totrain loggers in preventing

nonpoint source pollution. Outreach andEconomic Development

Programs are put in place to support the

efforts of the WatershedAgricultural Council.

1996

Fore

ster

s Lo

g O

n

An Ad Hoc Task Force on Agriculture and New

York City WatershedRegulations convenes

representing upstate anddownstate interests.

A collaborative plan ofpolicy recommendationscalled The Brown Book

is created to protectwater and “do no harm”

to farm operations in the watershed.

1991

Col

labo

rati

on

Phase I of the Watershed AgriculturalProgram begins withWhole Farm Planning

on ten pilot farms dispersed geographically

throughout theCatskill/Delaware

watersheds.

1992

Part

ners

WAC and New York Cityimplement a

Conservation EasementsProgram to purchase thedevelopment rights onwatershed farms. This

effort provides long-termwatershed protection

through a good balanceof watershed land useactivities. In the same

year, New York City, theUSDA and WAC enter

an agreement forincreased federal financialincentives for farmers toestablish riparian buffers

through the CREP.

1998

Con

serv

ing

Ope

n Sp

ace

WAC His tory

The WatershedAgricultural Council incor-porates as a not-for-profitorganization to administerthe voluntary, incentive-

based WatershedAgricultural Program, fully

funded by New YorkCity’s Department of

Environmental Protection.A Board of Directors

oversees the Council pro-grams, which are

administered by Officeand Field Staff. An

Advisory Committeeguides the Council.

1993

Inco

rpor

atio

n

Research efforts begun in Phase I continue

to test and validate best management

practices and study thesource, fate and transport

of pathogens and phosphorus.

1995

Soun

d Sc

ienc

e

Phase II of the Watershed Agricultural

Program begins with thedevelopment of Whole

Farm Plans for watershedfarms based primarily on nationwide USDAstandards. The goal of85% participation by

farmers becomes a mile-stone in the USEPA’sFiltration Avoidance

Determination for NewYork City’s

Catskill/Delaware watersupply. Participation

today is 91%.

1994

Impl

emen

tati

on

The urban/rural partnership in the New

York City watershedexemplifies a model for

the nation in conflict resolution and watershed

management. Wordspreads about the

Council’s successes andaccomplishments.

2000

WA

CC

eleb

rate

sG

row

th

2001

WAC Annual Report

Throughout the watershed, Watershed Agricultural Council (WAC) programsare at work. In these pages, you'll see accomplishments in every area, fromfarmer sign-ups to forest management planning. The Board, staff and partners ofWAC are on the job every day fulfilling our goals in the region: to promote well-managed farms and forests. Why? Because we see this as the future of both athriving rural economy and long-term water quality protection.

As we enter our second decade of watershed planning, it’s clear to WAC thatholistic watershed management is the right way to sustain two of our mostimportant natural resources: water and people. Every best management prac-tice we implement means work for people in our communities. Our fifteen mil-lion dollar annual funding yields both comprehensive pollution prevention anda positive economic impact on the watershed. As our research continues tobring national experts together to test and validate our work, our success isquantified and the impact of our work grows.

With the expansion of our Whole Farm Planning effort to small operations inthe Catskill/Delaware watershed, we’ve doubled the number of farms that willnow have access to the same water quality protection as the hundreds of larg-er farms already in the Watershed Agricultural Program. Since many of thesesmall operations are just starting up, Whole Farm Planning becomes part oftheir business plan – what better way to grow the economy in a sustainableway? As our daily contact with these landowners increases, so does our excite-ment about developing innovative ways to increase net farm income.

For farms in the Croton watershed, we now have a blueprint for prioritizingwatershed management on those distinctive operations, many of which haveimportant environmental issues vital to keeping the water clean. As agriculturaland forestlands are the largest remaining unplanned open space in this water-shed, landowners here have an immediate need for technical assistance.

But perhaps our greatest milestone this year was the closing of our first twoconservation easements on watershed farms, which took place in December.This unique tool for farmland protection gives us the ability to be a truly multi-faceted program and, with funding from New York City, is quite possibly theonly easement in the country that’s directly tied to water quality.

More and more, we hear about the challenges of urban sprawl, food andwater supply security and the survival of small family farms. In order to meet theincreasing interest in our accomplishments, we’ve revamped our internet website at www.nycwatershed.org. Who knows exactly what the watershed willlook like ten, twenty, or even a hundred years from now? WAC is strong, ourprograms are succeeding and it’s our hope that people will still care enoughabout farms, forests and clean water to support our efforts.

- Richard I. Coombe, Chair & CEO

Agriculture

Watershed Agricultural Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

Small Farms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

East-of-Hudson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Filtration Avoidance Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

CREP Accomplishments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

2001 BMP Accomplishments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-5

Forestry

Watershed Qualified Loggers and Foresters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Timber Harvest Roads/Forest Roads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Forest Management Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Riparian Area Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Conservation Easements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Research

Agricultural Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13-15

Forestry Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16-17

Outreach

Web Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

Cleansweep Chemical Disposal Day . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

Model Forest Interpretive Exhibit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

WAC Celebrates Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

O’Connor Foundation Farm Beautification Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

Forestry Education Initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

Natural Resources

Custom Service Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

Economic Action Program: Rural Dev. Through Forestry . . . . . . .23-24

Catskill Farmstead Cheese Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

Innovation in Agriculture Conference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24-25

Eco-Labeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

Finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27-28

Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

Contents

As the Whole Farm Planningeffort continued to meet its waterquality goals, the focus this year was on finding ways to increase the pace of implementation. Thecreation of a “pre-quali-fied” engineer’s list wasa major effort to engageconsultants from privateindustry, a concept thatWAC has proved suc-cessful in prior yearswith nutrient manage-ment planning.

A successful nutrientmanagement plan usual-ly involves spreading manure morefrequently on fields further from thebarn, creating higher fuel and equip-ment costs for the farmer. Taking a

page from the Conservation ReserveEnhancement Program (CREP),WAC is exploring ways to match

City funds with federalsources to improve theeconomic viability and,ultimately, the effective-ness of this practice.

WAC initiated a pilotprogram which givesfarmers a means to gaincredits through compli-ance with their nutrientmanagement plan andaccess funding to helpdefray the cost of theirequipment needs. In

this way, the farms maintain eco-nomic viability while providingeffective water quality protection.

Watershed Agricultural Program

“I don’t think

farmers in

general are going

to do a bad job

intentionally, but

with an incentive,

they’ll be able to

do a really good

job.”

- Dave Cammer,dairy & maple farmer

1

In the East-of-Hudson watershed,WAC established a field office thisyear and is currently in the earlystages of farmer sign-ups, planning anddesign of Whole FarmPlan implementation.The East-of-Hudsongroup developed aCroton AgriculturalPlan as a “blueprint”for delivering the pro-gram and a new prior-ity ranking methodol-ogy to be utilized inconjunction with theState’s AgriculturalE n v i r o n m e n t a lManagement (AEM)Program to identifyfarms with the highest pollutionpotential in the Croton watershed.

WAC has identified over one hun-dred program participants in the

Croton watershed and is currentlysurveying the needs of these farmsfor water quality protection. While

WAC’s Whole FarmPlanning programhelps protect waterquality, many commu-nities benefit directlyfrom this conserva-tion of resources. Agrowing population isresponding to theneed for farmlandconservation for thefuture. The growth infarmer’s markets andthe sustainable foodmovement over thelast ten years addsimpact to the con-

sumer’s view of small farmsthroughout the Northeast region.

Eas t -of -Hudson

Smaller farm operations in thewatershed vary widely and grow arange of products from meat, eggsand vegetables to Christmas treesand maple syrup. Within its firstyear, WAC’s program for smallfarms began implementing WholeFarm Plans on ten pilot farmsthroughout the West-of-Hudsonwatershed, and is currently survey-ing hundreds more to identify envi-

ronmental priorities for sourcewater protection. Sixteen additionalfarms have been selected for thenext phase of this growing pro-gram. While learning about bestmanagement practices for waterquality, these participating farmersare also gaining new access to tech-nical assistance through contactwith WAC.

Small Farms

“Watershed plan-

ning for farms and

forestland in the

region is a void that

needed to be filled,

for the benefit of

water quality, open

space and keeping

farmland viable.” - Mike Saviola

East-of-Hudson

Program Manager

2

3

Annual Status Review/Follow-up

Goals 12/2001: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73

Accomplishments: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .114

Nutrient Management Plans

Goals 12/2001: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .N/A

Accomplishments: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53

Farmer Sign-ups

Goals 12/2001: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .297

Accomplishments: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .322

Whole Farm Plans Summaries Approved

Goals 12/2001: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .273

Accomplishments: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .273

Whole Farm Plans Commenced Implementation

Goals 12/2001: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .212

Accomplishments: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .229

Farms Substantially Complete

Goals 12/2001: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .105

Accomplishments: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109

Filtration Avoidance Determination Goals*

*West-of-Hudson

4

CREP Accomplishments

Stream Buffers Implemented/Complete:

Linear Miles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..196.8

Acres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .708.8

Stream Buffers Planned/Under Contract:

Linear Miles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .408.8

Acres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1,472.0

Whole Farm Plan - BMP Description No. ImplementedWaste Storage Facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4Brush Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3Conservation Cover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Conservation Crop Rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3Cover Crop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Critical Area Planting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Diversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4Fencing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46Filter Strip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3Grasses & Legumes in Rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Grassed Waterway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Irrigation System /Micro-irrigation Trickle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Lined Waterway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Use Exclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Forage Harvest Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Pasture & Hayland Planting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2Pipeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3Prescribed Grazing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2Roof Runoff Management System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2Access Road . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8Heavy Use Area Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6Spring Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

continued

2001 BMP Accomplishments

5

Whole Farm Plan - BMP Description No. ImplementedAnimal Trails & Walkways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12Streambank Stabilization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Subsurface Drain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2Tree & Shrub Planting CREP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36Watering Facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2Underground Outlet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Waste Transfer System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6Agri-Chemical Mixing Facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Barnyard Water Management System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22Roofed Barnyard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3Calf Greenhouse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4Ventilation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4Milkhouse Waste - Backflow Safety Valve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Farm Fuel Facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6BMP Equipment Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14Anaerobic Fixed Film Digester/Separator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Solid Aerobic Bio-Dry Compost Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Sanitary Sewer Connection & 5 Year Fee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Greenhouse Irrigation System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Bridge - Animal Trails & Walkways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Riparian Forest Buffer CREP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13Nutrient Management Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62Waste Utilization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53Record Keeping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51Total No. of BMPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .417

Implementation Cost - NYC Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$2,133,752.38

Implementation Cost - Federal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$345,881.00

Small Farms - BMP Description No. of BMPsConservation Cover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Pond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Fencing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2Spring Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Animal Trails & Walkways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Tree & Shrub Planting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8Total No. of BMPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Implementation Cost - NYC Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$39,536.73

Implementation Cost - Federal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$39,534.00

The Watershed Forestry Programtrains and recommends “watershedqualified” loggers andforesters to landownersmanaging their forestswith timber harvests.These professionals aretrained in water qualityBMPs and are eligiblefor cost-shares on arange of traditionalBMPs and innovativetools to help them dotheir job with watershedprotection as the goal.Free samples of BMP tools such asthe open-topped pipe culvert, geo-textile fabric and organic bar and

chain oil, are made available byWAC field staff. In another pro-

gram, fourteen portablebridges were loaned tologgers for temporarystream crossings thisyear, yielding waterquality protection onharvests throughout theregion. A full range ofworkshops run by WAC,from Chainsaw Safety to“Getting To Know YourNew York State BMPField Guide,” help tim-

ber harvesters gain know-ledge andskills they can apply on every job.

Watershed Qualif ied Loggers

and Fores ters

Watershed Qualified Forestry Professionals

Timber Harvesters: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .149

Foresters: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34

Forest Roads Contractors: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

“The bottom line

is that on every

job, we want to

come back again.

BMPs make the

road better and

that’s our invest-

ment in the

future.”- “Watershed Qualified”

logger

7

8

Properly built forest roads protectsoil and water and last a lifetime.WAC offers loggers cost-sharingand other incentives for properlydesigning and installing timber har-vest roads using erosion controlbest management practices such aswater bars, culverts and broad-

based dips. This year, the ForestryProgram initiated a successful cost-share pilot for the remediation ofexisting forest roads with erosionproblems due to poor layout anddesign. Fourteen roads were reha-bilitated with erosion control BMPsand properly stabilized.

Number of Timber Harvest Road BMP Projects

2001: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

To date: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

Miles of Road Designed and Installed

2001: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24.2

To date: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35

Waterbars Installed

2001: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .466

To date: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .823

Broad-based Dips Installed

2001: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36

To date: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57

Forest Road Remediation Pilot Program

Number of Road BMP Projects Completed: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Miles of Road Remediated: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

Acres Stabilized: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Water Bars Installed: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .473

Broad-based Dips Installed: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58

Timber Harves t Roads/Fores t Roads

9

To encourage voluntary steward-ship of private forestland, theForestry Program pays for thedevelopment of a forest manage-ment plan for landowners with tenor more acres in the watershed.Through the process of workingwith a forester to plan the future of

their forest land, owners learnwhat’s there and how to activelymanage it using best managementpractices. As they gain technicalknowledge about these resources,their commitment to keeping theland forested grows.

Fores t Management Planning

Management Plans Complete

2001: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .86

To date: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .184

Forested Acres Under Management

2001: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9,586

To date: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28,532

Riparian Area Planning – New!

Management Plans Complete: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Acres Under Management: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .111

On land adjacent to streams,riparian area management hasbecome a valuable tool in maintain-ing and protecting water quality.This year the Forestry Programincorporated the USDA Forest

Service’s standards for delineatingand managing riparian areas intoten pilot management plans, addinganother tool in working with privatelandowners in the watershed.

Riparian Area Planning

The WAC Easement Program wasinitiated in 1996 as a component ofthe Watershed Memorandum ofAgreement (MOA) withNew York City. A WACeasement is distinctivein that it is designed toprotect water qualitythrough environmental-ly sound managementof farms and forestland.The easement addresseswater quality issues byidentifying sections of a farm asresource protection areas and fur-ther delineates which parts of afarm can be used for agriculturalproduction. Agriculture and forestryactivities on the land are carried outin accordance with Whole FarmPlans and forest management plansapproved by WAC.

WAC acquired its first conserva-tion easements this year on two

farms totaling 770 acres. This pro-gram is designed to pay landownersfor a permanent agreement limiting

the development of thefarm while allowing thecontinued use of theland for agriculture,forestry and recreation.WAC has signed con-tracts to purchase con-servation easements onan additional four farmsrepresenting 1,500 acres.

The acquisition of these easementswill take place in early 2002. During2001, the program opened theprocess to more landowners andselected ten additional farms.Appraisals of these farms are cur-rently establishing the value of theseconservation easements, and it isprojected that easements will beacquired on these properties overthe next two years.

Program Statistics

Whole Farms with Easement: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Acres under Conservation Easement:: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .770

Whole Farms Under Easement Contract: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Acres under Contract: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1,500

Whole Farms Under Appraisal: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

“The easement is

exactly what I

need: a means for

the farm to stay a

farm and not be

developed.”- Jim Lamport, dairy farmer

11

Research in Town Brook is acooperative effort with two mainobjectives: 1) Develop, implementand evaluate BMPs for minimizingphosphorus loss from farms repre-sented by those farms in the TownBrook basin; and 2) Apply andimprove field-scale and farm-scaleindices and models to supportnutrient management planningwithin the Town Brook basin. Thefindings of this project will beapplied in the Cannonsville water-shed and other Catskill watersheds.

There are several research proj-ects ongoing in the Town Brookbasin including: monitoring streamflow and water quality, collectingmeteorological data, evaluating theeffectiveness of milkhouse filterstrips through experimentation,quantifying the relationshipbetween soil phosphorus andrunoff phosphorus for soils on site,

and determining phosphorus leach-ing from intact soil cores throughlaboratory study. WAC’s TownBrook Research Group includesfarmers from the basin plus repre-sentatives from USDA AgriculturalResearch Service, USGS, CornellUniversity and DEP. The group iscurrently under the leadership ofDr. William J. Gburek and Dr.Andrew N. Sharpley, two worldexperts in the transport of phos-phorus through watersheds.

The group’s major goal for thecoming year is to add comprehen-sive pathogen research to projectsin this watershed, taking advantageof overlaps with Town Brook phos-phorus research where possible.This includes testing and validatingthe program’s current best manage-ment practices that are intended toreduce pathogen transport fromfarms.

Agricultural Research

Town Brook Research Group

13

14

This study, led by the NY StateDEC, aims to test the ability of theWhole Farm Plan to correctly identi-fy significant sources of on-farm pol-lution, and then recommend andimplement cost-effective manage-ment practices that substantiallyreduce pollutant losses from thosesources. A pair of watersheds is mon-itored, in this case one dairy farmand one non-agricultural control site,of similar size, shape, elevation andsoils. The agricultural watershedconsists almost entirely of the farmitself and is at the headwaters of asmall tributary that arises on thefarm. The control site is also a head-water watershed and is composed offorest land, abandoned field return-ing to forest and shrub land.

Both sites were monitored for twoyears prior to any best managementpractice installation on the farm inorder to establish an accurate rela-tionship between the hydrologicresponses of the agricultural water-shed and the control watershed. Thefarm was then treated with all prac-

tices recommended in its WholeFarm Plan. These include a 9-monthcapacity manure storage, a rotation-al grazing system, barnyard watermanagement, manure spreadingschedules, farm road improvement,milkhouse waste diversion to themanure storage, stream diversionaway from the barnyard area, tiledrainage, relocation of the silagestorage area and upland diversioninstallations. Monitoring beganagain in November 1996 and willcontinue for five years.

The results of the first two years ofpost-implementation sampling indi-cate a decrease in concentrationsloads of dissolved phosphorus leav-ing the farm. This would be consis-tent with storage of manure duringcritical runoff periods in winter andspring. There is also some evidenceof reductions in ammonia loads andconcentrations. Results of macroin-vertebrate sampling show clear-cutimprovements at the farm in thediversity of the stream biota (impor-tant indicator species).

In conjunction with CornellUniversity and New York StateEnergy Research and DevelopmentAssociation (NYSERDA), WACdairy farms are demonstrating twoinnovative systems for treating and

handling dairy manure to managevolume, nutrients, pathogens andodor. One farm was selected todemonstrate an anaerobic fixed-filmdigestion manure handling systemconstructed for reducing the foot-

Paired Watershed Research

NYSERDA

15

print and construction cost of a fullscale, complete-mix digester. Theend product allows for the applica-tion of manure on land adjacent toneighbors, and at the same time,gives the farmer the ability to dis-tribute available nutrients to thesefields. A second farm was chosen todemonstrate an aerobic compostedor “biodrying” system for reducingmanure mass and volume.

Phosphorus in the form of driedmanure is more economical to trans-port out of the watershed. Both ofthese innovative manure handlingsystems will be evaluated to deter-mine their effectiveness in manag-ing phosphorus and pathogens aswell as the economic viability ofthese BMPs to be used on otherwatershed farms. Construction ofboth projects was completed in July.

Pathogen Action Plan

Researchers from CornellUniversity are investigating solarcalf housing to determine its effec-tiveness in reducing the transport ofCryptosporidium parvum oocysts offfarms. Three different approacheswill be attempted to analyze theeffect of solar calf housing. First, acomparison will be made of thenumber of infected animals beforeand after installation of the solar

calf barn was installed. Second, thesurvivability of C. parvum will betested at three locations inside andoutside of the solar calf barn.Finally, the transport of thepathogen off the farm will be stud-ied by sampling runoff, streams andsoil most likely affected by the calfhousing. Initial farm samplingbegan this summer.

Solar Calf Greenhouse Study

A conference focussing onpathogens was held by WAC inPhiladelphia this fall, bringingtogether the nation’s leading expertson this field of research. The result ofthe meeting was the adoption of aPathogen Action Plan to guideWAC’s future efforts in this areaincluding the formation of aProfessional Advisory Committee,chaired by Dr. Ronald Fayer, to help

develop research, review proposalsand monitor research projects; theconvening of a group to develop newBMPs for composting calf manure onsmall dairy farms in New York Citywatersheds; and the initiation of apilot study to monitor calf manurecompost in independent laborato-ries. Additional research projects totest and validate current BMPs werealso identified by the group.

16

The Watershed Forestry Programcoordinates four model forests thatintegrate research,demonstration, con-tinuing educationand public outreach.Water quality moni-toring gages helpresearchers studythe effects of varioussilvicultural treat-ments on streamflow and water qual-ity. The four sitesreflect differenttypes of land ownership and arespread out East and West of the

Hudson. Once complete, eachmodel forest will contain a perma-

nent forest inventoryplot system, experi-mental treatmentblocks, a demonstra-tion access road withbest managementpractices (BMPs) andinterpretive signswith educationalscripts. Research atall four model forestsis coordinated by Dr.René Germain of

SUNY College of EnvironmentalScience and Forestry.

Fores try Research

Lennox Memorial ForestDelhi, Delaware County. A 70-acre site owned and operated by Cornell

Cooperative Extension of Delaware County and affiliated with their 4-H

Camp Shankitunk (Cannonsville watershed).

The Lennox Memorial Foresthosts hundreds of landowners andnatural resource managers from asnear as the surrounding Catskillsand New York City and as far as theU.K., Korea and Pakistan. An edu-cational kiosk on-site connectshealthy forests to clean water and atwo-mile demonstration road high-lights erosion control best manage-ment practices (BMPs).

Pre- and post-harvest data fromthis Model Forest will provide the

basis to study the role of coarsewoody debris on the forest floorand its role in how nutrient cyclingimpacts water quality. CityUniversity of New York researchersare also sampling bark at this forestin a study tracking airborne PCBtransport from the Hudson River tothe Catskills.

“A tour through

the model forest

teaches about

the complexity of

forest management

and the value

of long-term

planning.”- Tom Alworth,

Executive Director, CatskillCenter for Conservation

and Development

17

Frost Valley Model ForestDenning, Ulster County. A 240-acre site owned and operated by Frost Valley

YMCA and affiliated with their environmental education facility in Ulster

County (Neversink watershed).

Forest inventory plots were com-pleted in this mini-watershed whileSUNY-ESF and USGS monitors thestream. The next step is to observethe effects of harvesting and roadbuilding on nutrient cycling andmacroinvertebrates (important indi-

cator species) living in the stream. Aharvest operation is scheduled forthe winter of 2002, followed by theconstruction of a two-mile forestroad with appropriate BMPs willbegin.

Mink Hollow Model ForestWoodstock, Ulster County. A 250-acre site is owned and operated by

NYCDEP and affiliated with the SUNY New Paltz field campus in Ulster

County (Ashokan watershed).

Ninham Mountain Model ForestKent, Putnam County. A 150-acre site owned and operated by NYSDEC in

Putnam County (West Branch watershed).

At Mink Hollow, a USGS stream-monitoring gage samples streamflow and water quality in conjunc-tion with NYCDEP’s comprehensivewatershed monitoring program.

The USGS stream gage will providefive years of baseline data from anundisturbed forest, followed by fiveyears of data from a managed forestin the fifth year.

Similar to the Frost Valley ModelForest, researchers at NinhamMountain will examine the effects

of forest harvesting on nutrientcycling and macroinvertebrates.

WAC has occupied a spot incyberspace since its first websitewas designed in 1998. Since then,national and international attentionon watershed planning and itseffects on farms have grown a greatdeal. The WAC website gets thou-sands of hits per month from usersall over the world, including manystudents searching for the latestinformation on how watershed pro-grams are developing. The site ismeant to reach both upstate resi-dents and program participants as

well as downstate residents whomay also be watershed landowners.There are two “virtual tours” to illus-trate BMPs on a farm and in theLennox Model Forest. Over time,the site will be developed further asa resource for WAC participants, butright now the goal is to get the wordout about best management prac-tices and how they’re working hereon the ground. To access the site, goto www.nycwatershed.org.

Web Site

Installation of interpretive signs atthe Lennox Model Forest took placethis summer, offering a permanentexhibit of forestry best managementpractices to loggers, foresters andforest landowners, plus a steadystream of school-age children from

4-H Camp Shankitunk. At thebequest of John A. Lennox, a former4-H director and American TreeFarmer, the forest is a workingdemonstration to show how timberharvests can be managed in the NewYork City watershed. Both good and

Model Fores t Interpret ive Exhib it

Fourteen farms participated in thefourth annual Cleansweep ChemicalDisposal Day. Nearly twice the vol-ume of material was collected thisyear over last year from area house-holds, farms and businesses. Overthree hundred vehicles passed

through the Cornell CooperativeExtension parking lot in Hamden.Many volunteers stepped forward tohelp with the event, which hasbecome a successful partnershipeffort. Plans for the fifth annualevent are underway.

Cleansweep Chemical Disposal Day

19

20

It’s been over a decade sinceupstate farmers and New York Cityput down the roots for Whole FarmPlanning in the watershed with TheBrown Book. A celebration tookplace in June to mark the Council’sachievements and recognize thosewhose dedication and hard worklaid a solid foundation for the pro-gram. There was reminiscing about

negotiations with the City, efforts toset up risk assessment on farms,and how the farmer sign-up goalwas successfully reached. RetiringCouncil members Gail Dale, SandraDawson and Dave Taylor were hon-ored with thanks for their manyyears of dedication to the organiza-tion

WAC Celebrates Grow th

WAC administered $12,000 thisyear in funding from the O’ConnorFoundation to six farm operations inDelaware County for beautificationof their farmsteads. Now in itsfourth year, this effort helps Catskillregion farms by jump-starting proj-ects that have long been on the “todo” list and renews everyone’s pridein the beauty of rural culture. Dairyfarms in the New York City water-shed are the focus of worldwide

attention, with hundreds of visitorscoming each year to view implemen-tation of Whole Farm Planning forwatershed protection. Other agricul-tural tourism in the region includesactivities like “on the farm” visits,maple sugar days, and wholesaleand direct marketing of livestock,vegetables, wool, meat and eggs.These events connect consumerswith those who help conserve landand water resources.

O’Connor Foundation

Farm Beautif icat ion Projects

poor forestry practices exist side byside in this living classroom, alongwith water bars, culverts and otherwater quality best management

practices. An interpretive kiosk atthe trailhead links healthy forests tofavorable conditions in the streambelow.

Accomplishments

Projects Completed: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

In Progress: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

21

The Watershed Forestry Programcontinued its urban/rural educationand outreach activities targeted to forest landowners, water con-sumers, and environmental groupswith “Green Connections,” a youth education project for 120 upstate/downstate students.Supported with a USDA ForestService grant, it partnered urbanstudents in Brooklyn and Queenswith rural students in Ellenville andSouth Kortright during an interac-tive learning experience including

email, letters, art projects and fieldtrips. Participating students grewseedling trees in the classroom,which they later planted as a ripari-an buffer along the Neversink Riverduring a watershed field trip. A sec-ond field trip to New York Cityincluded visits to Inwood Park inManhattan, South Street Seaport,Alley Pond Environmental NatureCenter in Queens and the New YorkHall of Science where the studentscamped overnight in sleeping bags.

Fores try Education Init iat ives

Green Connections

The third annual WatershedForestry Institute for Teachers wassponsored at the Frost Valley YMCAStraus Center in Ulster County for16 teachers from New York City andthe watershed. To date, this popularprogram has provided 43 highschool and middle school teachers

with forestry curriculum materials(i.e., Project Learning Tree, ProjectWILD Aquatic, and Ways of theWatershed) and hands-on environ-mental instruction. Four days werespent exploring a watershed modelforest, water supply reservoir and anactive timber harvest site.

Watershed Forestry Teacher’s Institute

An informational newsletter forwatershed forest landowners waspublished this year and mailed toover 20,000 people owning forest-land in the Catskill/Delaware andCroton watersheds. Also, a water-shed forest science symposium washeld for natural resource managersto bolster sound science initiativesin water quality protection. The

Forestry Program also sponsoredthree major educational workshopsand site visits for almost 300 water-shed forest landowners living in theCatskills and the New York metro-politan area. These one-day work-shops covered the topics of agro-forestry, timber theft, and properforest management for watershedprotection.

Landowner Outreach

In an effort to help farmers con-trol production costs and maximizeefficiency, WAC is currently survey-ing farmers about theirinterest in custom fieldservices and equip-ment leasing. For manysmall operations typi-cal to the Catskillregion, increasing costsof labor and equipmentmay make custom fieldservices or leasing asmart economic alter-

native to purchasing expensive butseldom-used machinery. Reliableprofessional providers, using mod-

ern equipment mightbe more efficient,timely and productive.By exploring this management tool,farmers could poten-tially choose a way to remain competitivethat eases the need forcapital purchases inuncertain times.

Cus tom Service Survey

“We can’t all

afford to buy

every piece of

equipment and

custom service

works well out

west. I think it’s

worth a try.” - dairy farmer

Since June 2000, the USDA ForestService awarded two grants totaling$1.2 million to support theWatershed Forestry Program’s RuralDevelopment through ForestryGrants Initiative. Thisyear, an expert grantscommittee made 22awards to Catskill-based wood productsbusinesses exceeding$960,000 for a range ofprojects from comput-

er upgrades and apprenticeship pro-grams to new woodworking equip-ment and research on kiln dryingmethods. The Watershed ForestryProgram hired an administrator for

the grants initiative inOctober and antici-pates awarding fundsthrough 2004. Theprogram is successfulbecause many viablewood-based industriesin the region are

Economic Action Program:

Rural Development Through Fores try

“We are fully

prepared on a

professional level

to take our

business forward.”- Jenifer Green,

GreenTree Furniture &Accessories

23

24

unable to secure adequate expan-sion funding from traditionalsources and with this grant, a busi-ness can expand without goingdeeply into debt. The results areimproved efficiencies, cutting-edge

wood technologies, and innovativemarketing campaigns, all of whichunderscore WAC’s goal of ensuringthat forestry remains a viable enter-prise to protect water and to bolstereconomic vitality in the Catskills.

Some day, farmstead cheese makers may be to the CatskillsMountains whatwineries are to NewYork’s Finger Lakes.“The farmstead spe-cialty cheese indus-try is poised for the same take-offthat farm wineriesenjoyed twenty yearsago,” notes MikeChamberlain, a busi-ness consultant whocompleted a feasibili-ty study and busi-ness plan for twoCatskill mountaindairy farms onbehalf of WAC this year. All of thenecessary ingredients are here: cli-

mate, lush mountain pasture, anddedicated family farmers who have

the skill, patience andintelligence to growtheir businesses slow-ly while they masterthis ancient craft.There are already sev-eral excellent goatcheese farms and one new cow cheesemaker in the area. The conversion ofsome traditional dairyfarms in the regionwould create moremomentum, provid-ing food tourism andmarketing opportuni-

ties similar to those found in otherparts of the country.

Catskill Farms tead Cheese Project

“Consumers are

interested in iden-

tifying where their

food is coming

from. Farmstead

cheese production

would add value

to our milk and

help us meet our

goal of having this

farm support a

second family in

the future.”

- Paul Deysenroth,

dairy farmer

Farm entrepreneurs and businessdevelopment specialists gathered ata conference arranged by WAC inDecember to discuss marketing

opportunities and the resourcesavailable to help keep area farmsgrowing. The agenda highlighted avariety of ways that local farmers are

Innovation in Agriculture Conference

25

Representatives of The FoodAlliance, a highly-respected west-coast environmental label, met withWAC to explain its program’s east-ern expansion and what it couldmean for watershed farmers main-taining best management practices.

An eco-label identifies productsmade in an environmentally con-scious way, recognizing and reward-ing farmers for environmental stew-ardship. It can also help producersgain market access and consumerattention.

Eco-Label ing

meeting the challenges of compet-ing in the modern marketplace, withpresentations from Catskill FamilyFarms Cooperative (specialty pota-toes) and Meadow Raised MeatsAssociation (pastured meats andpoultry), as well as farm marketretailers, an “on-farm” bed andbreakfast and value-added projectsfor milk – like farmstead cheese pro-

duction. The conference made clearthat new business and marketingskills are needed to take these ideasto the next level. WAC’s goal is toprovide assistance by coordinatingthe tools and services they need,whether it’s marketing education,regional promotion or businessdevelopment services.

Watershed Agricultural Council33195 State Highway 10, Walton, NY 13856

phone • 607-865-7790 fax • 607-865-4932

Headquarters of the Watershed Agricultural Council in Walton, NYThis institution is an equal opportunity provider. NY Relay Service #1-800-662-1220

Report Design by Margaret Dunlop HelthalerCover Photo: Digital Imagery© copyright 2002 PhotoDisc, Inc.

2001 Revenues

2001 Expenses

27

28

2001 2000Revenue:

Program Services:Whole farm planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$2,048,203 $1,805,185BMP implementation & construction . . . . . . . . . . . . .2,277,727 3,009,392Program administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .633,162 746,992Forestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .542,753 291,47Economic development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0 57,975Natural Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78,909Education and outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .110,510 36,822Easements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .682,898 446,008Research & Technical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .235,001 113,000

Total Program Revenue 6,609,163 6,506,846

Other Revenue:Federal awards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .316,826 141,347Foundation grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27,710 11,520Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79,185 51,398Economic development and other grants . . . . . . . . . .289,052 204,299Acquisition of plant equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0 0Donated Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .252,613 273,278

Total Other Revenue 965,386 681,842

Total Program and Other Revenue 7,574,549 7,188,688

Expenditures:Whole farm planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1,771,565 1,785,782BMP implementation & construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2,503,253 2,406,566Program administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .579,390 558,848Depreciation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61,663 54,925Research & technical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .113,631 108,818Easements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .368,915 212,284Economic development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .231,478 279,126Natural Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46,966Education & outreach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66,810 42,376Forestry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .609,570 356,217Donated services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .252,613 273,279Acquisition of fixed assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(31,122) (65,225)

Total Expenditures 6,574,732 6,012,996

Excess (Deficiency) of Revenuesover (Under) Expenditures 999,817 1,175,692

Net Assets, Beginning 3,253,045 2,077,353

Net Assets, Ending $4,252,862 $3,253,045

Watershed Agricultural Council of the New York City Watershed, Inc.Schedule of Activ it ies by Program - Unres tricted

for the Years ending June 30, 2001 and 2000

excerpt from: Independent Auditors Report 10/15/2001Sperry, Cuono, Holgate, Churchill, C.P.A’s., PC.

2001 Watershed AgriculturalCouncil Directors

David Cammer, Schoharie

Peter Clark, Delaware

William Coleman, Delaware

John A. Cook, Delaware

Richard I. Coombe, Chair & CEO,Sullivan

Steven Fleming, Delaware

Dennis Hill, Delaware

Gail Hillriegel, Ulster

Fred Huneke, Vice Chair, Delaware

Peter Kamenstein, Westchester

Floyd Many, Secretary, Delaware

Joel A. Miele, Commissioner NewYork City DEP

William Murphy, Westchester

Howard Nichols, Treasurer,Delaware

David Post, Delaware

Jim Robertson, Delaware

John Verhoeven, Jr., Greene

Barbara Wilkens, Westchester

Watershed Forestry ProgramCommittee

Robert Bishop, Delaware

Karl Connell, Sullivan

Charles Johnston, Delaware

Larry Schaefer, Delaware

WAC Staff

Troy Bookhout, NutrientManagement Specialist

Kevin Brazill, Forestry ProgramSpecialist

Dave Dolan, Easement ProgramManager

Brian Fisher, Forestry ProgramManager

Daniel Flaherty, Small FarmsCoordinator

Colleen Griffith, Finance Director

Jim Hilson, Senior Planner

Pauline Klimowski, DatabaseSpecialist

Brian LaTourette, EngineeringSpecialist

Cheryl Marion, Office Manager,Assistant to Chair & Council

Lilly Mathisen, Contracts Manager

Ann Nowakowski, ForestryProgram Assistant

Jean Parenteau, Easement ProgramAssistant

Justin Perry, Watershed Forester

Karen Rauter, Outreach Specialist

Linda Reed, Staff Accountant

Adina Risdal, Engineering Specialist

Mike Saviola, Croton ProgramManager

Kim Scamman, WAC Engineer

Alan White, Executive Director

Agency Liasons

Rick Weidenbach, DelawareCounty SWCD

Gary Lamont, USDA NRCS

John Thurgood, CornellCooperative Extension

Carol Dennis, Farm Service Agency

Larry Beckhardt, NYCDEP ProgramDirector

Ed Blouin, NYCDEP AgriculturalProject Manager

John Schwartz, NYCDEP ForestryProject Manager

Charles Laing, NYCDEP Real EstateSpecialist

Marcus Phelps, US Forest Service

WAC Advisory Committee

New York State Department ofAgriculture & MarketsNathan Rudgers, Commissioner

New York State Soil & WaterConservation Committee

New York State Department ofHealth

Bureau of Public Water SupplyProtectionJim Covey, Assistant Director

New York State Department ofEnvironmental ConservationTom Snow

USDA Natural ResourcesConservation Service

United States EnvironmentalProtection AgencyJeff Gratz, Region II

American Farmland TrustJerry Cosgrove

Catskill Watershed CorporationAlan Rosa, Executive Director

Delaware County Action PlanDelaware County Board ofSupervisorsJames E. Eisel, Sr.

New York State Farm BureauRoger Hamilton

New York City Department ofEnvironmental ProtectionMichael Principe, Deputy Director

Cornell UniversityMargaret Smith

PACE Environmental Law ClinicMarc Yaggi

Empire State Forest ProductsAssociationKevin King

Office of the GovernorLynette Stark

SUNY College of EnvironmentalScience & ForestryDr. Peter Black

Lutz Feed CompanyDoug Whittaker

First Pioneer Farm CreditDavid H. Pugh

Watershed Protection &Partnership CouncilWilliam C. Harding, ExecutiveDirector

Norwich RC & DPhilip Metzger, Executive Director

USDA Farm Service AgencyAllien LaPierre

29

Wat

ersh

ed A

gric

ultu

ral C

ounc

il33

195

Stat

e H

ighw

ay 1

0

Wal

ton,

NY

138

56

Non

-pro

fit O

rgU

.S. P

osta

ge

PAID

Perm

it N

o. 7

Del

hi, N

Y 1

3753