REPORT ON
POLLUTION OF THE NAVIGABLE WATERS
OF
MORICHES BAY
AND
EASTERN SECTION OF
GREAT SOUTH BAY
LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION
HUDSON-CHAMPLAIN AND METROPOLITAN COASTAL
COMPREHENSIVE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PROJECT
METUCHEN, NEW JERSEY
SEPTEMBER, 1966
-------
for
"REPORT ON POLLUTION OF THE NAVIGABLE WATERS OF MORICHES BAT AND EASTERN
SECTION OF GREAT SOUl'M BAT"
Page 14: Table V- Figure under heading "Total Coliform per day11 should
read 7-1 x 3D11 instead of 2.5 x 10lif.
-------
REPORT ON
POLLUTION OF THE NAVIGABLE WATERS
of
MORICHES BAY
and
EASTERN SECTION OF GREAT SOUTH BAY
Long Island, New York
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION
HUDSON-CHAMPLAIN AND METROPOLITAN COASTAL
COMPREHENSIVE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PROJECT
Metuchen, New Jersey
September, 1966
-------
"Great South Bay and Moriches Bay, Long Island, N. Y.
... Biologists studying this problem conclude that until such a
time as the pollution is stopped at its source or the inlets
to Moriches and Great South Bay are appreciably widened and
stabilized, the shellfish industry and the recreational in-
terests in the area will be at the mercy of unpredictable and
uncontrollable meterological conditions."
The President's Science Advisory Committee
November, 1965
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Conclusions and Recommendations iv
I. Description of Area
Geography 1
Population and Economy 1
II. Hydrography 3
III. Water Use
Domestic Water Supply 6
Bathing 6
Finfishing 6
Shellfishing 7
Boating 7
Duck Farming 7
IV. Sources of Wastes
Duck Farms 9
Industrial Wastes 13
Municipal Wastes 15
Cesspools and Septic Tanks 15
Recreational Boating 17
Other Sources of Pollution 18
V, Effects of Wastes on Water Quality and Uses
Bacteria 21
Nutrients 22
Suspended Solids 24
VI. Pollution Abatement Programs 26
VII. Bibliography 30
APPENDIX
New York State Conservation Department, Notice to all
Shellfish Harvesters, Town of Southampton
New York State Conservation Department, Notice to all
Shellfish Harvesters, Town of Brookhaven
New York State Department of Health, Order of
Modification
iii
-------
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The navigable waters of Moriches Bay and the easterly end of
Great South Bay receive the discharge of wastes from extensive duck farms,
municipal and domestic sewerage systems, industrial operations, recre-
ational boats, and land drainage. As a result, these waters are
polluted by bacteria, suspended solids, and nutrients.
2. As a result of the bacterial contamination of the overlying
waters, substantial areas in Moriches and Great South Bays have been
closed by State authorities to the harvesting of shellfish. These clo-
sures have resulted in substantial economic injury with the loss of a
shellfish crop with a value in excess of $2,500,000 annually.
3. Accordingly, the pollution of these navigable waters is sub-
ject to enforcement measures under the provisions of Section 10 of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.
U. In addition to constituting a health hazard via shellfish,
the bacterial contamination of the waters of the study area constitutes
a potential hazard to the health and welfare of persons utilizing these
waters for recreation. The pollution of these waters by suspended
solids and nutrients has resulted in an unsightly appearance, the pro-
duction of objectionable odors, and excessive growths of algae and
other aquatic plants. These conditions limit the use of these waters
for recreational bathing, boating, and esthetic enjoyment.
5. The major sources of bacteria, solids and nutrients to these
waters are the extensive duck growing farms lining the shores of a
iv
-------
number of tributary streams. Although these farms do provide settling
ponds, the existing treatment facilities do not provide effective re-
moval or control for BOD, nutrients and bacteria and are only partially
effective in removing settleable solids. Other known sources of pol-
lution in the area include the discharge of primary treated municipal
wastes from one sewage treatment plant, industrial waste discharges,
the transport of nutrients and bacteria from individual domestic
sewage treatment facilities, and the discharge of bacteria and solids
from recreational boats using these waters. Surface and groundwater
runoff of agricultural chemicals also serve as additional contribut-
ing factors in the pollution of these waters.
6. The pollution of these waters is complicated further by the
natural hydrographic conditions. The Bays have extremely limited
circulation patterns so that flushing times are extreme. The silta-
tion of Moriches and Fire Island Inlets has been shown to be an
important factor in the control of water quality problems in the
study area.
7. The waters under consideration have been classified and
water quality standards have been adopted by the New York State De-
partment of Health, the agency having legal jurisdiction over water
pollution control in the study area. This classification has been
conducted through the New York State Water Resources Commission, the
state agency charged with such classification.
8. To date abatement orders issued by the State of New York
have failed to abate effectively pollution of these waters.
v
-------
Modification of these orders to incorporate new abatement requirements
and time schedules is currently underway.
9. In order to achieve satisfactory water quality it will be
necessary for all waste discharges to be abated at the source.
10. Adequate treatment facilities should be constructed to handle
the effluent from all duck farms discharging into the study area.
Such facilities should meet, as a minimum, the requirements called
for in the New York State proposed order of modification, which re-
quires that the facility be capable of providing at least 85% removal
of suspended solids and BOD, a substantial removal of phosphates, and
effective disinfection to the extent that the final effluent shall at
all times contain a chlorine residual of not less than one-half part
per million after not less than 15 minutes contact time, and an MPN
of coliform organisms not greater than 100 per 100 ml in at least
90% of the samples in a series thereof, provided that at no time may
the MPN of such organisms in the final effluent exceed 10,000 per
100 ml. Design and construction of facilities to accomplish the
above treatment should be in accordance with the following time sched-
ule included in the New York State Order of Modification:
a. Preliminary plans for treatment to be submitted on or
before January 1, 1967;
b. Final construction plans to be submitted on or before
August 1, 1967;
c. Construction to be initiated on or before November 1,
vi
-------
1967 and to be completed on or before April 30, 1968;
d. After construction, such facilities shall be maintained
and operated in such a condition that they shall meet
the requirements listed above.
In addition to the requirements of the Order of Modification, substan-
tial removal of other nutrient materials, particularly the nitrogen
group, should also be required.
11. The treatment requirements and time table listed above should
also be adopted for all other sources of wastes discharging to these
waters with the exception of individual cesspools and septic tanks
handling domestic sewage. Current plans for the formation of sewer
districts to collect and provide adequate treatment of the wastes now
being handled by these individual systems should be implemented as
soon as possible, with facilities in operation no later than January
1, 1970.
12. Recent legislation requiring all recreational boats in the
area having toilets to provide either adequate treatment facilities
or holding tanks capable of storing waste material for subsequent
discharge to on-shore treatment facilities should be implemented as
soon as possible.
VI1.
-------
I. DESCRIPTION OF AREA
Geography
The area under consideration for this report lies on the south
shore of Long Island, New York. It consists of Moriches Bay, west of
Westhampton Beach, and the eastern end of Great South Bay, east of a
line connecting Blue Point and Water Island. Included are Patchogue
Bay, Bellport Bay and Narrow Bay, the connecting waterway between
Great South Bay and Moriches Bay. Also included are the coves,
rivers and estuaries tributary to the main bays. Figure 1 shows the
study area.
Great South Bay and Moriches Bay are separated from the Atlan-
tic Ocean by a narrow sand bar, in places only a few hundred yards
wide. Both bays are extremely shallow, varying in depth from one to
11 feet with a mean depth of four feet. Moriches Bay is nine miles
long and varies from one to two miles in width. Great South Bay, in
its entirety, is 24 miles long, averages three miles in width, and
has an area of 95 square miles. That portion of Great South Bay in-
cluded in this report is eight miles long and two to four miles wide.
Population and Economy
The study area lies in the towns of Brookhaven and Southampton
in Suffolk County. These towns are essentially rural in character
and are dotted both inland and along the shore by small incorporated
villages and unincorporated areas. The townships have experienced an
upsurge in population growth in recent years. In the period 1950-1961,
-------
the population of the town of Brookhaven increased from 44,522 to
114,780, while that of the town of Southampton increased from 17,013
to 28,467 people. During this same decade, the entire Suffolk County
experienced a 149 percent increase in population, from 276,129 to
697,462.* The population boom in Suffolk County has continued, with
estimates of 756,000 by 1963 and 950,000 by the end of 19652. These
figures indicate the rapid growth experienced on Long Island as
people have moved farther from New York City.
Land use in the study area is mainly residential, recreational
and agricultural. There are many summer homes along the ocean and
bay shores, and a number of public and private bathing beaches are
maintained throughout the area. Smith Point County Park, located
on Great South Beach between Great South Bay and Moriches Bay, is
part of the long narrow sand bar lying to the south of Great South
Bay which constitutes Fire Island National Seashore.
The area is well known for both produce and poultry. Potatoes,
cauliflower, asparagus, tomatoes, lima beans and strawberries are the
chief crops. The Long Island duck has become a household word
throughout the country. These ducks are raised on farms lining the
shores of the rivers and inlets along the mainland. In 1965, there
were 39 active duck farms in Suffolk County2. Thirty-two of these,
producing more than three million ducks per year, are located in the
study area.
-------
II. HYDROGRAPHY
Although the annual rainfall in Suffolk County averages 43 inches,
due to the small size of the watershed there are no major fresh water
3
streams discharging into the bays under consideration. However, there
is a large groundwater reservoir under all of Long Island. According to
the U. S. Geological Survey, there is a natural discharge from this subsur-
face reservoir, which occurs through a seaward movement of groundwater and
some surface streamflow. As a result of the'limited surface runoff, there
are only small volumes of fresh water which enter Moriches and Great South
Bays. Enough sea water enters through the Fire Island and Moriches Inlets
to maintain the salt distribution in the bays but the volumes of new ocean
water available for mixing in each tidal cycle are extremely small away
k
from the inlets.
The main circulation in the two Bays appears to result from the prog-
ressive nature of the tidal wave, which because of the shallow depths and
differing lengths of the two bays causes hydraulic currents in the narrow
connecting channels. When both Fire Island and Moriches inlets are open,
the water movement is easterly from Great South Bay into Moriches Bay.
When Moriches Inlet is closed due to silting, water movement is reversed.
One series of measurements, taken in July 1950 when both inlets were open
indicated that about 20 million cubic feet of water moves from Great South
and Bellport Bays into Moriches Bay during one tidal cycle.5
This tidal circulation is so limited that wind induced currents can
nullify or even reverse the flow. In November 1951, for example, a per-
sistent wind augmented the flow between the two Bays for four successive
-------
days, and moved the equivalent of two-thirds the volume of Moriches Bay
west into Bellport Bay. Undoubtedly, part of this movement was due to the
fact that Moriches Inlet was closed so that the normal net tidal flow was
westerly.
During the summer, the prevailing winds are light and westerly,6
inducing circulation patterns which augment the normal tidal circulation.
As a result, water from Great South Bay is transferred to Bellport Bay,
increasing the hydraulic head on the Smith Point end of the narrows and
moving water into Moriches Bay. This same combination of tidal hydraulics
and prevailing winds then results in the movement of Moriches Bay water
east through the Potunk Point Narrows into Shinnecock Bay.5
The maximum water current is eight feet per second through Fire Island
Inlet and six feet per second through Moriches Inlet. The total volumes per
tidal cycle flowing through these inlets are 2.0 billion and 0.2 billion
cubic feet, respectively.5'7 There is a net flow seaward through Moriches
Inlet, which has been measured as about 18 million cubic feet per tidal
cycle.5 In the open Bays, the maximum tidal current is one half a foot
per second, and the east-west tidal excursion is of the order of 1.5 miles.
The few measurements of net drift that have been made indicate upper values
of about one mile per day. Flushing times of four to ten days have been
estimated for the western portions of Great South Bay.**" The mean tidal
range is ^.1 feet at Fire Island Inlet and 2.9 feet at Moriches Inlet,
and decreases to 0.8 feet at Bellport and 0.5 at Mastic Beach. Maximum
reported storm tide (November 1950) at Fire Island Inlet was 9.4 feet
above mean'sea'level.?
-------
In general, this tidal circulation is sufficient to prevent strati-
fication in the open Bays, but not near the inlets and rivers. For
example, the water is definitely stratified in the upper tidal portion
of the Forge River, a factor which sometimes contributes to poor water
quality.9'10
Water temperatures range from freezing to about 30°C. In summer,
the highest temperatures are found in the extensive shallow areas and in
the upper portions of the river estuaries. '9
Salinities range from close to zero in the upper portions of the
river estuaries to more than 30 parts per thousand in the open portions
of the Bays.6'9
The weak circulation in these Bays results in a limited amount of
available dilution water. This unsatisfactory condition for waste
assimilation is worsened by the tendency of winds and currents to confine
wastes and waters to the eastern end of Great South Bay, at the farthest
possible point from sources of clean dilution water. Hence, due to these
circulation problems, the Bays are not suited for the assimilation of
large pollution loads.
-------
III. WATER USES
Domestic Water Supply
The primary source of water supply for all purposes in Suffolk
County is ground water, generally obtained from individual wells.
These same ground waters also provide water for agricultural irriga-
tion and for operating duck farms. Almost 20 billion gallons of
ground water were withdrawn from Suffolk County's underground reser-
voirs in 1956H. This withdrawal is accompanied by a high return
rate. The U. S. Geological Survey has estimated that for 1961 in
Suffolk County, "probably 80 percent of the water pumped from pub-
lic, private and industrial wells is returned to the ground."
Bathing
The waters of Mariches and Great South Bays are used exten-
sively for recreational bathing at both public and private beaches.
In 1965, the Suffolk County Department of Health issued permits for
108 bathing beaches. There are also many miles of privately owned
shore line where the waters are used for bathing. In 1966, a portion
of the sand bar separating Great South Bay from the ocean was dedi-
cated as Fire Island National Seashore. With this facility available,
it is expected that recreational bathing will increase as an influx
of tourists begins to enjoy this site.
Finfishing
The area serves as an important commercial fishing source. In
1961, a total of 354,000 pounds of fish were landed in Great South
Bay and Mariches and Shinnecock Bays.l
6
-------
Sport fishing is also very popular in the area. Many deep sea
fishing boats operate from the various marinasi and private boats of
all sizes are used for fishing.
Shellfishing
Shellfish, primarily hard clams, are harvested extensively from
the area. In 1961, more than two million pounds of shellfish were
taken from the area1. At one time, the area supported an extensive
oyster harvest, but in recent years the crop of oyaters has been
reduced and the oyster is no longer a significant factor in the
economy of the area.
Boating
The dramatic increase in recreational boating activities on the
national level has been reflected along the entire Long Island shore.
As increasing numbers of persons have more leisure and income, there
has been an accompanying growth in boating, so that there is now an
abundance of all types and sizes of pleasure boats using the waters
of Great South Bay and Moriches Bay. Nine yacht clubs and numerous
marinas dot the shoreline from Patchogue Bay to Westhampton.
Duck Farming
The operators of duck farms make extensive use of the waters of
the rivers, creeks, coves and estuaries, which drain into the bays.
These bodies of water and the adjacent shore areas are fenced and diked
to form holding pens which provide the ducks with access to both land
and water. With traditional methods of duck farming, the majority
of the wastes are carried away from the pens by surface water that
7
-------
is diverted through the runs, or by ground water that is either pumped
into the runs or infiltrates into them. Water usage at typical duck
farms ranges from 14 to 120 gpd per duck. At the larger farms, water
12
usage can be in the order of 2-3 mgd . In some instances dry farm-
ing techniques have been adopted in order to reduce the water require-
ments.
-------
IV. SOURCES OF WASTES
The waters of the study area serve as a receiving body for the
discharge of wastes from extensive duck farms, municipal and domestic
sewerage systems, industrial operations, recreational boats, and sur-
face run-off and land drainage.
Duck Farms
There are 34 duck farms, two of which are reportedly out of
business, located on waters tributary to Kbriches, Bellport and
Patchogue Bays. The location of the farms is shown in Figure 1.
The owners and the reported annual production are given in Table 1.
Table I
DUCK FARMS TRIBUTARY TO STUDY WATERS
12
Location
'No.*
Trib. to Bellport Bay:
1
2
3
Total to Bellport Bay:
Trib. to Moriches Bay:
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Owner
Gallo Brothers
Leskowicz
Carmen River Farm
Paul Choenoma
De Piazzy
Jucglielewicz
Swift Stream Duck Farm
Borak Farm
Lukert
Hallock Brookside
Forge River Duck Farm
Harry A. Smith
Walter R. Smith
Robert H. Smith
Stanley Chornoma
Yearly Duck
Production
250,000
200,000
200,000
650,000
50,000
100,000
150,000
100,000
100,000
150,000
120,000
100,000
50,000
Out of business
60,000
80,000
-------
Table I (Cont'd)
Location Yearly Duck
No. * Owner Production
16 Chi-Dux Duck Farm 90,000
17 Joseph Podlaski 50,000
18 Vigliotta & Son 60,000
19 Mam Soroka 50,000
20 Adam Kanas 60,000
21 Breezy Acres 60,000
22 Zygtnunt Babinski 50,000 '
23 Chester Massley 50,000
24 Big Seatuck Duck Farm 90,000
25 Antone Anczurowski Out of business
26 Peter Kostuk 150,000
27 Tuttle Brothers 80,000
28 Eastport Spec.Duck Waste Dist. 350,000
29 Spring Water Duck Farm 80,000
30 Anna Pacholk 50,000
31 Stephen Kuczma 70,000
32 Leroy Wilcox 50,000
33A) C & R Duck Farm Unknown(Breeders!
33B)
Total to Moriches Bay 2,450,000
Total to Heliport & Moriches Bays: 3,100,000
*As shown on Figure 1.
In large scale duck production, holding pens and di-kes are built
across the stream or other body of water and on the adjacent shore.
The ducks move freely between the land and water, depositing waste
directly into the stream as well as on the banks. During rainfall,
the accumulated organic matter is washed into the stream. Even when
the shoreline droppings are raked up, some organic matter is retained
.12
by the soil and washed to the water area by rains.
A number of studies have been conducted of the characteristics
of the wastes associated with duck farms. The results of several such
10
-------
studies by the New York State Department of Health are presented in
Table II«
Table II
CHARACTERISTICS OF RAW DUCK FARM WASTES13,lfr,15
Ranges Reported
Characteristic lbs/day/1000 ducks
BOD 20'6 - 37
Total Solids 163
Suspended Solids 96
Total Nitrogen 5.7 - 6.2
Kjeldahl Nitrogen 8.2
Total Phosphate 6.8 - 12.4
Soluble Phosphate 2.6 - 6.9
The volume of waste flow from duck farms varies widely. A study
by Gates16 in 1959 reported water use varied from four to 96 gallons
per duck. The same study showed coliform concentrations in the ef-
fluent ranged from 5.8 x 106 to 58 x 106 MPN per 100 ml. Cosulich12
found the water use at five selected farms ranged from W to 120 gal-
lons per day per duck, and that coliform concentrations were of the
same order of magnitude as reported by Gates.
No measurement has been made of the total waste loadings from
duck farms. Table III presents estimated loads, based on the data
i
cited above, and on duck production figures shown in Table I. These
loads were calculated on the basis of a nine month (March through
11
-------
Table III
ESTIMATED LOADS FROM DUCK FARM WASTES
Tributary No.
To : Farms
Bellport Bay 3
Moriches Bay 29
Study Area 32
Flow
Yearly Ave. Duck MOD
Production Population (1) (2)
650,000
2,450,000
3,100,000
116,700 7,0
439,800 26.4
556,500 33.4
MPN
Coliform
Per Day (3)
5 x lO1^
20 x 1015
25 x 1015
Loadings in Pounds per Day (4)
Tributary
To : BOD
Total Susp.
Solids Solids
Total Kjeldahl
N N
Total Soluble
Bellport Bay 2,920 18,670 11,670 700 930 1,170 580
Moriches Bay 10,990 70,370 43,980 2,640 3,520 4,390 2,200
Study Area 13,910 89,040 55,650 3,340 4,450 5,560 2,780
(1) Assuming 9 month (39 weeks) season and duck life of 7 -weeks.
Average Duck Population = 7/39 x yearly production.
(2) At 60 gal/day/duck.
(3) Assuming waste MPN coliform density of 20 x 106/100 ml.
(4) Based on following waste characteristics in pounds per 1,000 ducks
per day:
BOD 25
Total Solids 160
Suspended Solids 100
Total Nitrogen 6
Kjeldahl Nitrogen 3
Total Phosphate 10
Soluble Phosphate 5
12
-------
November) duck production season and an average duck life of seven
weeks.
Based on the data in Table III, the duck farming industry repre-
sents a source of 14,000 Ibs per day BOD; 3,300 Ibs per day total
nitrogen; 5,600 Ibs per day total phosphate; and 55,600 Ibs per day
of the suspended solids in a total waste flow of 33MGD. In addition,
these wastes contribute 25 million billion MPN coliform per day to
the receiving waters. It is recognized that these loadings are for
raw wastes and that some attempts have been made to treat the waste
at selected farms. By 1965, all of the duck farms in the area had
settling lagoons in operation for removal of duck waste solids.
These existing treatment facilities were reported to be only partly
effective in removing settleable solids, and are not effective in re-
moving biochemical oxygen demand, nitrogen, phosphates and micro-
organisms. In addition, there were times when some farms bypassed
2 12
their treatment facilities. '
Industrial Wastes
Industrial waste discharges in the area emanate from a poultry
processing plant and a fabric finishing mill.
A study17 of duck-processing wastes was made in 1964 at two
plants on Long Island, one of which was reported to discharge its
waste through ponds to an area of Moriches Bay. The results of the
1964 study at this plant are presented in Table IV.
13
-------
Table IV
CHARACTERISTICS OF RAW DUCK PROCESSING WASTES
Waste Flow, gallons per duck 24.3
BOD, Ib. per 1000 ducks 43.2
Susp. solids, Ib. per 1000 ducks 31.0
Coliform, No. per 100 ml 56,800
During the four days of the study, the plant processed an aver-
age of 13,675 ducks per day. Table V presents the estimated raw
waste loads from this plant, using this production figure and the
data from Table IV.
Table V
ESTIMATED LOADINGS - RAW DUCK PROCESSING WASTES
Flow BOD Susp. Solids Total Coliform
gal/day Ibs/day Ibs/day per day
332,000 590 420 2.5 x lO1^
In 1964, the raw waste from this operation was discharged to a
settling pond prior to discharge to Moriches Bay. NO data are avail-
able on the efficiency of treatment obtained by this settling or on
the quality of final effluent discharged to the bay. However, visual
observation of the settling pond and final effluent indicate an un-
satisfactory removal of waste material.
No data are available on the wastes from the fabric finishing
plant in Patchogue, the Patchogue-Plymouth Mill. During the early
1950's this firm discharged fabric finishes and dyes to Patchogue
14
-------
Creek. In 1954, the New York State Department of Health initiated
abatement action against this firm. By January, 1963 abatement had
been achieved according to Health Department records.
Municipal Wastes
The only municipal waste source discharging to the study area
waters is that of the Village of Patchogue, which has a sanitary
sewer and primary treatment plant operated by the Patchogue Sewer
District. In 1951, this plant was reported^ to provide inadequate
treatment for 3,400 persons. By 1954, alterations and improvements
were underway and the State of New York indicated the plant would
19
provide adequate treatment on completion of the work. The avail-
able data on this plant as of 1966 are presented in Table VI.
Table VI
9O
DATA ON PATCHOGUE SEWER DISTRICT TREATMENT PLANT
Type of Population Design Receiving
System Served Flow-MGD Treatment Water
Separate- 5,000 0.5 Screens, grit removal, Patchogue
Sanitary settling, post- Creek
chlorination
Assuming a BOD of raw municipal sewage equal to 0.17 Ibs. per
capita per day and 30% removal by primary treatment, the discharge
from this plant represents a load of 600 Ibs. per day of BOD which
is only five percent of that attributed to the duck farms.
Cesspools and Septic Tanks
The majority of the residents in the drainage areas of the study
waters dispose of domestic sanitary sewage by individual cesspools or
15
-------
septic tanks. If the soil is porous and has a high ground water level,
the wastes from such systems tend to contaminate and become a part of
the ground water flow. This contamination of the ground water has been
demonstrated by pollution of many wells in the area. In 1963, for
example, the Suffolk County Department of Health estimated that 35 per-
cent of the individual wells in Center Moriches were polluted. In
areas of non-porous soils, cesspool and septic tank systems fre-
quently overflow and the waste becomes a part of the surface run-off.
The rapid increase in population for the study area and for all
of Suffolk County has been described earlier in this report. Table
VII presents the 1960 population data for those communities lying
within the drainage area under consideration and south of Sunrise
Highway. These communities, with the exception of a portion of
Patchogue, rely on individual sub-surface disposal means to handle
sanitary wastes.
Table VII
MAJOR COMMUNITIES IN DRAINAGE AREA.
South of Sunrise Highway
Name 1960 Population1 Means of Waste Disposal
Bellport Village 2,461 Individual Sub-surface
Center Moriches 2,521 Individual Sub-surface
East Moriches 1,210 Individual Sub-surface
Mastic Beach 3,035 Individual Sub-surface
Mastic-Shirley 3,397 Individual Sub-surface
Patchogue Village 8,838 (3,838 Ind. Sub-surface
(5,000 Patchogue Sewer Dist.
Total 1960 Population 21,462
16
-------
Hence, of the 21,000 persons in the immediate area, more than
16,000 attempt to discharge their wastes into the ground. Previous
studies of ground water flow in the area of Brookhaven, Suffolk County,
have shown a general southwesterly movement of ground water at a rate
99
of approximately 0.3 feet per day . Although the movement of sub-
surface water through soil does reduce bacterial contamination and
suspended solids, dissolved materials such as nitrogen and phosphate
can be transported with no decrease in concentration. Hence, the
use of septic tanks and cesspools by the large rural type population
provides a mechanism for injection of pollutants into the ground
water and subsequent transport via the sub-surface aquifers into the
adjoining surface waters. The transport of nutrients such as nitro-
gen and phosphate in this manner presents a significant source of
pollution to the waters of the study area.
Recreational Boating
While no information is available as to the magnitude of prob-
lems associated with the use of these particular waters for
recreational boating, studies elsewhere havs shown that recreational
boating represents a significant source of pollution. In areas of
high boat density, such as marinas, the discharge of human waste with
inadequate or no treatment results in pollution by bacteria and
solids.
Other- Sources of Pollution
In addition to the sources of pollution described above, water
quality may be adversely affected by a variety of other land and water
17
-------
based activities. As part of the intense agricultural activity
associated with truck farms found throughout Suffolk County, large
quantities of agricultural chemicals are spread over the surface of
the land. As a result of rainfall, excess chemicals are washed into
the surface waters or percolate into the ground water aquifers.
Hence there is a transport of material, including nutrient fertili-
zers and toxic herbicides and pesticides, across and through the
land into adjacent bodies of water. This source should be recognized
as a possible contributing factor to the problems in the waters of
the study area.
Additional degradation of water quality can occur as a result
of extensive dredging activities. The disturbance of the bottom by
dredges can result in a re-suspension of accumulated organic sludges
and silt. In addition, uncontrolled dredging can result in the
formation of significant potholes in the bottom of the bays. Such
potholes can markedly increase detention time and reduce circulation,
thereby preventing adequate mixing of pollutants with the receiving
water, and subsequent flushing of the system.
18
-------
V. EFFECTS OF WASTES ON WATER QUALITY AND USES
There have been many water quality studies in Moriches Bay and the
eastern portion of Great South Bay. Most of these studies were conducted
for relatively limited purposes and hence did not include consideration
of all parameters of water quality and all adverse effects of degradation
in quality on the various water uses. Hence, it is necessary to draw on
a number of reports for an overall evaluation of the extent of pollution
and its effects.
The President's Science Advisory Committee has summarized the pollu-
tion problem in Great South Bay and Moriches Bay as follows:
"1. Great South Bay and Moriches Bay, Long Island, N. Y.: Agricul-'
tural and domestic sewage pollution.—A serious pollution problem which
caused the failure of a once prosperous shellfish industry and lessened
the recreational use and esthetic value of Great South, Moriches, and
Shinnecock bays prompted the towns of Islip and Brookhaven (Suffolk Co.,
N.Y.) to commission Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (W.H.O.I.) to
conduct an analytical survey toward finding the causative agents and their
necessary remedial measures. W.H.O.I, has conducted this survey since 1950,
"Using phosphorous concentration as an index of pollution, W.H.O.I.
investigators traced the source of pollution to duck farms in Great South
and Moriches Bay. Studies of the bay's hydrography showed that the low
flushing rates of the bays were responsible for holding the pollutants long
enough to permit massive proliferations of minute algae which were dele-
terious to oysters. Dredging Moriches inlet open served to increase the
19
-------
flushing rate and consequently pollution was substantially reduced. It
did not recur until the inlet silted in sufficiently to lower the flushing
rate. Conclusions from this study were that low salinity and low flushing
rates augment ill effects of these pollutants (in this case the organic
nitrogen compounds from duck-farm waste) and that remedial measures are
any that will raise salinity and flush out nitrogenous wastes. These
generalizations appear to have held true during the period of the in-
vestigation.
"Biologists studying this problem conclude that until such a time as
the pollution is stopped at its source or the inlets to Moriches and Great
South Bay are appreciably widened and stabilized, the shellfish industry
and the recreational interests in the area will be at the mercy of un-
predictable and uncontrollable meterological conditions.
"In 196^ residents of Brookhaven and adjacent towns complained again
of foul smells emanating from Great South Bay. In spite of a decline in
the duck farming industry, pollution was great enough to hamper recrea-
tional use of parts of the Bay, and bubbles of H2S and methane belching
from bottom potholes discolored paint of houses near the water. It was
then found that dredged areas along the shore served as traps for large
multicellular algae which underwent anaerobic degradation, producing
the unpleasant gases. Much of the rotting material came from abnormally
expanding Zostera beds in shallow areas of the Bay. It appears now that
pollution from the duck farm wastes is now being augmented by an increasing
human population along the bay shore and that septic tank wastes may have
become the major source of algal nutrient. No study of these new develop-
ments is in progress as of this date.******""
20
-------
Many of the specific conditions described below have been observed
in the streams that receive duck farm wastes in the area under considera-
tion, and have led to numerous complaints. The discharge of wastes to
these waters has caused economic injury to the shellfish industry, de-
creased esthetic enjoyment, produced offensive odors, decreased producti-
vity of fish and other aquatic life, and interfered with recreational
uses of the waters. On the beaches adjacent to the mouths of some of the
streams strips of black, odorous sludge have accumulated on the sand at
the water's edge, or may be uncovered by digging into the shallow layers
of sand that have been washed over them by wave action.
Bacteria
Bacteria from duck and human feces constitute a major pollution
problem in the waters of the area. The major source of bacteria is the
duck raising industry, although some bacteria survive the sewage treat-
ment process of the Village of Patchogue, or may reach the bay waters from
inadequate private sewage disposal systems of individual homes along the
waterfront. Other bacteria are discharged from recreational boats using
these waters.
Bacterial pollution has caused the closure of valuable shellfish
water in both Moriches Bay and Bellport Bay, as well as in other areas
of Great South Bay. Those areas closed to shellfishing are shown in
Figure 1. Copies of the closure orders are included in the Appendix.
According to the Shellfisheries Management Unit of the State of New York
Conservation Department, harvesting of clams is prohibited in 4,510 of
the 10,775 acres of Moriches Bay and 1,600 of the 3,840 acres of Bellport
21
-------
Bay. The combined closed acreage, representing 42% of the total water
area, is estimated to be capable of producing more than 300,000 bushels
of clams annually, with a value in excess of $2,500,000. This unharvest-
able crop represents a major economic loss to both the shellfish industry
and the area as a whole. Most of the bacterial pollution that necessi-
tates closing of these shellfish waters appears to originate on the many
duck farms clustered along the streams of the area from Speonk River on
the east to Carmans River on the west, as shown in Figure 1.
An additional 400 acres of shellfish beds in Patchogue Bay are closed
to harvesting because of bacterial pollution from the Village of Patchogue
sewage treatment plant. Summer homes that may contribute to the bacterial
pollution of adjacent waters are located principally along Narrow Bay
which connects Moriches and Bellport Bays.
The economic loss in shellfish production is not the only damage
caused by bacteria. The streams on which duck farms are situated, in-
cluding their tidal sections and adjacent waters, are subjected to bac-
terial pollution that in some areas is a definite hazard to the health of
those coming in contact with the waters. In other areas, the bacterial
contamination makes the use of the waters for such recreational activities
as swimming, boating, and fishing questionable. The detection of particu-
lar species of Salmonella bacteria known to cause human gastrointestinal
diseases, in the wastes of several duck farms and the receiving waters
emphasizes the existence of this hazard to human health.
Nutrients
Human and animal feces contain phosphorus and nitrogen that serve as
22
-------
nutrients, or fertilizer, for both land and water plant life. Although
other elements are necessary as nutrients for plant growth, deficiencies
in phosphorus and nitrogen are believed to be the most common limits on
aquatic plant growth. Current technology permits the design of treatment
plants capable of removing these elements from sewage and industrial
waste, although conventional treatment plants provide only slight reduc-
tion of these materials.
Both Moriches and Bellport Bays, as well as the entire Great South
Bay, are rich in phosphorus and contain adequate nitrogen to support
prolific growths of both suspended and attached algae. Whereas open
coastal waters commonly contain 0.02 to 0.05 milligrams per liter (mg/1)
of phosphorus (as P), the enclosed Moriches and Bellport Bays have been
found to contain from 0.02 to more than 1.0 mg/1 of phosphorus. While
the limiting concentration of phosphorus for excessive algae growth in
sea water has not been established, the commonly accepted limiting con-
centration in fresh water is 0.01 to 0.015 mg/1.
The limiting value of nitrogen for aquatic plant growths in fresh
water is generally accepted to be 0.3 mg/1 (as N). The waters of the two
bays have been found to contain from 0.2 to 0.9 mg/1 of total nitrogen.
Sources of this phosphorus and nitrogen are the wastes from duck farms,
the direct discharge of domestic and municipal sewage, and percolation
from private home sewage disposal systems.
With the adequate supply of nitrogen and the abundance of phosphorus,
the waters of the bays support luxurious growths of suspended algae,
attached filamentous algae and rooted aquatic plants. The suspended
23
-------
algae have caused both economic and esthetic damage. In 1955 especially,
and to a lesser degree in other years, a particular form (Nannochloris
atomiusj of very minute suspended algae clogged the gills of clams and
markedly reduced their quality and production in Moriches Bay, resulting
in economic losses. The suspended algae generally reduce esthetic enjoy-
ment of the bay waters by reducing their clarity, sometimes to the extent
that objects in more than two feet of water are not visible from the surface.
These algae forms also pose a threat to the dissolved oxygen content of
the bay waters. Dissolved oxygen is necessary to support aquatic life,
including fish. With unfavorable changes in environmental conditions, the
sudden death and subsequent decomposition of the dense algae population can
deplete the dissolved oxygen of areas of the bays to the extent that fish
and other aquatic life are not able to survive.
The attached filamentous algae and rooted aquatic plants cause another
and very obvious type of esthetic damage. They become detached from their
moorings, especially during periods of turbulent water, accumulate as
slimy masses in the surf and wash up on the shore. It is not uncommon to
see masses of these detached plants covering long reaches of the shore
several inches deep and many feet from the water's edge. They not only
present a most unsightly appearance but also decay and produce extremely
offensive odors. With shoreline conditions such as these, the waters have"
an extremely limited recreational value.
Suspended Solids
Wastes from duck farms contain variable concentrations of suspended
solids. In some cases, the concentration of suspended solids may be as
-------
much as one-half of that found in untreated domestic sewage. These sus-
pended solids include large proportions of decomposable organic solids.
Upon discharge to the receiving streams, the suspended solids immedi-
ately impart a disagreeable grey turbidity to the waters and diminish their
esthetic appeal. The heavier solids settle to the stream bottom in the
vicinity of the points of discharge and form objectionable and harmful
sludge deposits. These sludge blankets cover and destroy the bottom aqua-
tic animals that serve as food for fish. The organic material in the sludge
undergoes a decomposition process which lowers the dissolved oxygen level
in the overlying waters, at times to below that needed for fish and other
aquatic life to survive. When complete depletion of oxygen occurs, the
further decomposition of organic matter produces obnoxious hydrogen sul-
fide gas which appears as bubbles on the surface. This gas breaks loose
masses of the deposited sludge and lifts them to the surface where they
appear as unsightly grey to black odorous clumps and rafts.
The lighter suspended solids are carried downstream by the velocity
of the flowing water to settle and form similar sludge banks in eddy
areas distant from the points of discharge. In coastal streams, the salt
content of the sea water precipitates the fine colloidal portions of the
suspended solids to form additional sludge deposits where fresh and salt
waters meet.
Thus, these suspended solids may produce harmful effects throughout
the entire lengths of the receiving streams from the points of discharge
to their mouths.
25
-------
VI. POLLUTION ABATEMENT PROGRAMS
The State of New York, originally through its Water Pollution Control
Board and more recently through the New York State Water Resources Com-
mission, conducts a program of classification of state waters. Such a
program delineates the best usage for the waters and establishes applic-
able water quality standards which are to be met so as to make possible
such water usage.
In 1951, the State classified the waters of Moriches Bay and its
tributary streams. This was followed in 1954 by the adoption of classifi-
cations for the waters of Patchogue and Bellport Bays, the adjoining
southerly portion of Great South Bay, and the tributaries to these waters.
In general, the classifications adopted require water quality suitable
for shellfish propagation in the open bays and bathing on the shoreline,
with lower classifications for the various tributary streams so as to
permit reasonable use for waste disposal.
Following classification, the State issues comprehensive plans for
the abatement of pollution and upgrading of the waters to meet the adopted
standards of water quality. In February of 1952, a comprehensive plan was
issued for the abatement of pollution from the waters of the Moriches Bay
drainage basin. This plan included orders for the abatement of pollution
resulting from the operation of duck farms and set a timetable requiring
completion by April, 1954, but was noted as being flexible and took recog-
nition of the lack of satisfactory methods for the treatment of duck farm
wastes.
26
-------
In January 1954, a comprehensive plan was issued for the abatement of
pollution from the waters of the Great South Bay - Easterly Section Drain-
age Basin, which includes Patchogue and Bellport Bays and their tributaries.
This plan established a requirement for the removal of all ducks from open
natural waters and the installation and operation of devices for the
effective removal of settleable solids. No date for the meeting of such
requirements was established by this order.
Based on available information, the requirements of the abatement
orders issued in 1952 and in 1954 have yet to be met by the various duck
farms.
In early 1966 the New York State Department of Health was considering
an order of modification establishing a timetable for the abatement of
pollution by duck farm wastes. Under the terms of this order, a copy of
which is included in the Appendix, submission of preliminary plans for
biological treatment would be required on or before January 1, 1967.
Such treatment would be required to provide at least 85% removal of sus-
pended solids and BOD, removal of a substantial portion of the phosphorus,
and effective disinfection of the effluent. The order also stipulates
that final construction plans for such facilities must be submitted on or
before August 1, 1967 and construction must be undertaken on or before
November 1, 1967 so as to be complete on or before April 30, 1968. The
order would further require maintenance and operation of these treatment
facilities so that they shall, at all times, meet the performance criteria
described above.
The Suffolk County Department of Health conducts an annual inspection
27
-------
program of duck farm waste treatment facilities. The Department's Annual
Report for 1963 described the poor compliance record obtained through that
date. By 1965, however, inspection showed that all of the active duck
farms had in operation settling lagoons.
A number of studies have been made to determine feasible means of
treatment of the duck farm wastes. In 1957, a Special Waste Disposal
District was established in the Town of Southampton to construct a treatment
plant to abate pollution from several duck farms. The project was deter-
mined to be eligible for financial assistance under the Construction Grants
Program of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and construction of a
primary treatment plant was started in June of 1958. In January of 1959,
the Public Health Service made a partial payment of $5,000 towards the
cost of the plant„ The plant was reportedly completed in July of 1961 at
a total cost of $29,400 and a request was made for a final payment of
$2,350 by the Federal Government. However, an inspection by the Public
Health Service immediately after completion of construction indicated a
structural failure in the tank. After correcting this failure, the
operating agency still failed to complete connections to the plant and
to operate the plant in a satisfactory manner. The Federal Government
has not yet made its final payment toward the cost of this plant due to
continuing lack of adequate operation and maintenance, and a field visit
in August 1966 indicated the plant was not in use.
The interest in the abatement of pollution from duck farm wastes is
demonstrated by the emphasis placed upon this problem by the New York
State Joint Legislative Committee on Natural Resources. The 1959 Report
28
-------
of this committee noted "Each year for the past seven years the Committee
has convened a year-end inventory conference on the Long Island duck wastes
pollution problem." The Committee has reviewed this problem and made
specific recommendations over a number of years.
In September of 1965 the Suffolk County Department of Health received
an interim report on a comprehensive sewerage study for the five western
towns of Suffolk County. This report suggested the creation of two sewage
districts to collect, treat, and dispose of water-borne waste. The pre-
liminary design encompasses a series of interceptor sewers, a treatment
plant providing 90% or better removal of all objectionable constituents,
outfalls to conduct plant effluent to the Atlantic Ocean, and facilities
for the recharge of the groundwater by treated effluent.
Also in September 1965 the Suffolk County Board of Supervisors
authorized the formation of a Suffolk County Sewer Agency charged with
carrying out studies leading to the preparation of plans and ultimate
construction of sewerage facilities for Suffolk County.
29
-------
APPENDIX
-------
VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY
IS Statistical Abstract of Nassau and Suffolk Counties. The Franklin
National Bank of Long Island, 1962.
•'.. "£/•?,•
2. Annual Report - 1965. Suffolk County Department of Health.
3. Hud son- Champ la in Project Basic Data Book. U. S. Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, Hud son -champ la in and Metropolitan Coastal Compre-
hensive Water Pollution Control Project. Unpublished, based on
U. S. Geological Survey Surface Water Records, 1966.
b. A Study of Water Circulation in Parts of Great South Bay, Long
'.:'; Island. Field Operations Section, Technical Services Branch,
DWSPC, R. A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
and Water Supply and Pollution Control Program, Region II, New
York City, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, U. S.
Public Health Service. (Unpublished Manuscript) 1962.
5. Survey Report - Moriches and Shinnecock Inlets, Long Island, New
York. U. S. Army Engineer District, New York, Corps of Engineers.
Revised, 1958.
6. Ryther, J. H. ; Vaccaro, R. F. ; Hurlburt, E. M. ; Yantch, C. S. ; and
' 1.1 Guillard, R. R. L. Report on a Survey of the Chemistry, Biology
and Hydrography of Great South Bay and Moriches Bay Conducted During
June and September, 1958, for the Townships of Islip and Brookhaven,
Long Island, New York. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Reference
Number 58-57 (Unpublished Manuscript) 1958.
7. Review Report on Beach Erosion Control Cooperative Study - Atlantic
Coast of Long Island, N» Y. , Fire Island Inlet and Shore Westerly
to Jones Inlet. U. S. Army Engineer District, New York, Corps of
Engineers, 1963.
8. U. S. Department of Commerce, Coast and Geodetic Survey. Tide
?:;- Tables, East Coast North and South America Including Greenland.
U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 1966.
- '
9. Barlow, John P.; Lorenzen, C. J. ; and Myren, R. T. Eutrophication
of a Tidal Estuary. Limnology and Oceanography 8(2) ;251-262. 1963.
J - < - — — --
10. Myren, Richart T. A Study on the Effect of Turbulence and Oxygen in
the Estuarine Environment. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cornell
University, College of Agriculture, Ithaca, New York) 196^. vV'
30
-------
.11. Hoffman, J. F. and Lubke, E. R. Ground Water Levels and their
'^q?2> Relationship to Ground-Water Problems in Suffolk County, Long
Island, New York= U, S< Geological Survey, Bulletin GW-44, 1961.
12. Cosulich, William F, Treatment of Wastes from Long Island Duck
Jr'..l(.<; Farms. Report for Suffolk County, New York, Department of Health,
^f March 1966,
13. Unpublished Data, Division of Laboratories and Research, New York
State Department of Health, 1952„
14. Ibid, 1955.
15. Ibid, 1957,
16, Gates, Co D. Treatment of Long Island Duck Farm Wastes. Water
'^v,fi 3 Pollution Control Board, New York State Department of Health, 1959.
17. Morris, Grover L, Duck-Processing Waste. Public Health Service
A-^i/i, Publication No. 999~.WP-.31j July 1965 =
18. Report on Water Pollution Control, New York-New Jersey Metropolitan
Area, Fed
Water Poll
July 1951.
. Area, Federal Security Agency, Public Health Service, Division of
^ui Water Pollution Control, North" Atlantic Drainage Basins Office,
Plan for Abatement of. PoUutioji , Great Squt£ Bay_-
Easterly Section,, Water Pollution Control Board, New York State
Department of Health, January 1954.
20c Unpublished Data. New York State Department of Health Sewage
Treatment Works Inventory, May 1966.
21. Annual Report - 1963. Suffolk County Department of Health.
22. Long Island Ground Water Pollution Study. Temporary New York
^1M State Water Resources Planning Commission, July 1963.
23. Etestoring the Quality of Our Environment . Report of the Environ-
mental Pollution Panel, President's Science Advisory Committee,
The White House., November 1965,,
31
-------
COPY
TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON
Page 1 of 4
NEW YORK STATE CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT
SHELLFISH SANITATION AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
OAKDALE, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK 11769
NOTICE TO ALL SHELLFISH HARVESTERS
The following is a Statement of the Sanitary Condition of the
shellfish lands including a listing of those areas which are closed
to the taking of shellfish of all kinds for the town in which you
claim residency. THE STATE LAW PROHIBITS YOU FROM WORKING IN ANY
AREAS THAT ARE CLOSED TO THE TAKING OF SHELLFISH. You may not work
in any of these closed areas without first obtaining proper permits
from this Department. The Conservation Department holds you respon-
sible for being acquainted with the sanitary condition of any and
all areas from which you harvest shellfish.
If you intend to harvest shellfish in waters of any town other
than that in which you claim residency, it is mandatory that you
contact either the Town Clerk of the town in which you intend to
work, or the Shellfish Sanitation and Engineering Services Office of
the New York State Conservation Department and obtain a listing of
any areas that may be closed to shellfishing in that town.
NOTICE OF CONDITION OF ALL SHELLFISH GROUNDS LOCATED WITHIN OR ADJA-
CENT TO THE TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK,
The shellfish lands within the County of Suffolk, Town of South-
ampton, except those listed hereafter, are in such sanitary condition
that shellfish thereon may be taken for use as food, and such lands
are designated (open) areas.
The following shellfish lands within the County of Suffolk, Town
of Southampton, are in such sanitary condition that shellfish thereon
shall not be taken for use as food, and such lands are designated un-
certified (closed) areas.
Town of Southampton
Moriches Bay
1. All of Seatuck Cove and its tributaries north of a line ex-
tending easterly from the southernmost tip of Havens Point
to the mouth of the canal known locally as Wetzel's Creek,
including all of Wetzel's Creek.
-------
TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON
Page 2 of 4
Town of Southampton
Moriches Bay (Continued)
2. All rivers, creeks and canals of the mainland shore between
Havens Point and the highway bridge at Potunk Point, including
all those at Westhampton Beach, except Ouantuck Canal.
3. That area of Speonk Cove north and west of a line extending
northeasterly from the southernmost tip of Speonk Point to the
summer cottage near shore on the property of the Cedar Beach
Hotel at the foot of Jagger Lane at Tanner Neck (local land-
mark ).
4. Also that area lying north and east of a line extending north-
easterly from the southeasternmost tip of Forge Point to Buoy
Fl R"27" in the main channel and thence easterly along the
buoyed channel through the bay to the highway bridge at Potunk
Point including all of the buoyed channel, from May 1 to
October 31, both inclusive.
Quantuck Bay
1. All mainland creeks and canals at Quogue except Quogue Canal.
2. Ouantuck Creek north of the Montauk Highway.
Shinnecock Bay
1. All creeks and canals at East Quogue including that area of
Weesuck Creek north and east of a line extending due east from
the southeasternmost utility pole on Weesuck Avenue to the
opposite shore.
2. All of the Shinnecock Canal.
Note: All reference points in the above areas in the Town of
Southampton taken from U.S.C. & G. S. Nautical Chart 120-SC
edition of 1964, except as indicated as "local landmark."
Mecox Bay
1. Hay Ground Cove north of a line extending due west from the
northern shore of Calf Creek at its mouth (local names).
2. Also Hay Ground Cove, Calf Creek and the area within a one-
quarter-mile radius of the mouth of Hay Ground Cove, from
May 1 to October 31, both inclusive.
-------
TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON
Page 3 of 4
Town of Southampton
Mecox Bay (Continued)
Note: All reference points in Mecox Bay in the Town of Southampton taken
from U.S.C. & G.S. Chart #1212 dated May 25, 1963, except as indicated
as "local names".
Sag Harbor
1. That area of Sag Harbor and its tributaries lying within or west
of the breakwater and south and west of a line extending north-
westerly from the northern end of the breakwater to the south-
eastern corner of the 1 last white house at the southern end of
East Harbor Drive at North Haven (owned in January 1965 by J. B.
Carr) and east of the highway bridge known as the Sag Harbor-North
Haven Bridge (local landmarks).
2. That area of Sag Harbor Cove and Upper Sag Harbor Cove lying west
of the highway bridge known as the Sag Harbor-North Haven Bridge
(local landmark).
Note: All reference points in Sag Harbor in the Town of Southampton taken
from U.S.C. & G.S. Chart #363 dated August 31, 1964, except as
indicated as "local landmark".
Peconic River
1. All tidal waters of the Peconic River and its tributaries within
the Town of Southampton.
Flanders Bay and Reeves Bay
1. That area of Flanders Bay and Reeves Bay lying south and west of a
line extending northwesterly from Red Cedar Point to Channel Buoy
Fl R"6" and thence northerly to Sims Point at Fanning Beach (local
landmarks).
2. All rivers, creeks and canals tributary to Flandera Bay and Reeves
Bay.
Note: All reference points in Peconic River, Flanders Bay and Reeves Bay
in the Town of Southampton taken from U.S.C. & G.S. Chart #363, dated
August 31, 1964, except as indicated as "local landmark".
-------
TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON
Page 4 of k
Town of Southampton
Atlantic Ocean
1. All areas of the Atlantic Ocean in the Town of Southampton are
certified (open) for the taking of surf clams only.
Dated: Albany, N.Y.
March 20, 1965
As Amended through
March 15, 1966
By:
R. Stewart Kilborne
Conservation Commissioner
Quentin R. Bennett
Marine Fisheries Sanitarian
-------
COPY
TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN
Page 1 of 4
NEW YORK STATE CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT
SHELLFISH SANITATION AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
OAKDALE, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK 11769
NOTICE TO ALL SHELLFISH HARVESTERS
The following is a Statement of the Sanitary Condition of the
shellfish lands including a listing of those areas which are closed
to the taking of shellfish of all kinds for the town in which you
claim residency. THE STATE LAW PROHIBITS YOU FROM WORKING IN ANY
AREAS THAT ARE CLOSED TO THE TAKING OF SHELLFISH. You may not work
in any of these closed areas without first obtaining proper permits
from this Department. The Conservation Department holds you respon-
sible for being acquainted with the sanitary condition of any and
all areas from which you harvest shellfish.
If you intend to harvest shellfish in waters of any town other
than that in which you claim residency, it is mandatory that you
contact either the Town Clerk of the town in which you intend to
work, or the Shellfish Sanitation and Engineering Services Office of
the New York State Conservation Department and obtain a listing of
any areas that may be closed to shellfishing in that town.
NOTICE OF CONDITION OF ALL SHELLFISH GROUNDS LOCATED WITHIN OR AD-
JACENT TO THE TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK.
The shellfish lands within the County of Suffolk, Town of
Brookhaven, except those listed hereafter, are in such sanitary con-
dition that shellfish thereon may be taken for use as food, and such
lands are designated certified (open) areas.
The following shellfish lands within the County of Suffolk,
Town of Brookhaven are in such sanitary condition that shellfish
thereon shall not be taken for use as food, and such lands are desig-
nated uncertified (closed) areas.
Town of Brookhaven (South Shore)
Great South Bay
1. All of Patchogue Creek, Swan Creek, Mud Creek, Hedges Creek,
Howell Creek, and all other creeks and canals between Blue
Point and Howell Point.
-------
TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN
Page 2 of H
Town of Brookhaven (South Shore)
Great South Bay (Continued)
2. That area of Patchogue Bay, and all adjacent creeks and canals,
lying north and west of a line extending southeasterly from a
privately maintained light (Fl G"B") at the end of the bulkhead
forming the entrance to the canal and boat basin at Blue Point
(Corey Creek) to Buoy N"4" in the channel leading to Patchogue
Creek, and continuing northeasterly to a privately maintained
light (F-R) at the southeastern tip of the bulkhead forming the
Village Dock at the foot of Ocean Avenue in Patchogue, and thence
easterly to the southern tip of two sunken wooden barges (local
landmark) near the entrance to the first canal and boat basin east
of Mud Creek. (When the above lights are not operating the bulk-
head extremities on or near which the lights are located will
serve as markers for the lines of closure.)
Bellport Bay
1. That area north and east of a line extending easterly from the
flagstaff at the Bellport Yacht Club at the dock at the foot of
Bellport Lane in Bellport to Black Buoy Fl G"5" in the main channel,
and continuing southeasterly along the main channel to Red Buoy
Fl R"12" near Smith Point, and thence northeasterly to the tip of
Smith Point.
Narrow Bay
1. All that area, including Johns Neck Creek and all creeks and
canals of the mainland shore, between a line extending southerly
from Smith Point to the flag tower on Great South Beach and a line
from shore to shore passing due north and south through Buoy Fl
G"17" located in the main channel near Pattersquash Island.
2. All of Pattersquash Creek and the area of the mouth of Pattersquash
Creek.
3. The canal known locally as Mastic Beach Lagoon and the area of the
mouth of said canal.
Moriches Bay
1. That area north and west of a line extending northeasterly from
the mouth of Home Creek (local landmark) to Masury Point, including
all of Home Creek, the Forge River and its tributaries, and all
other creeks and canals of the mainland shore between Forge Point
and Masury Point.
-------
TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN
Page 3 of 4
Town of Brookhaven (South Shore)
Moriches Bay (Continued)
2. That area north and west of a line extending northeasterly from
Masury Point to the privately maintained light (Fl G) at the mouth
of Orchard Neck Creek, including all of Senix Creek, Orchard Neck
Creek and all other creeks and canals of the mainland shore between
Masury Point and Orchard Neck Creek.
3. That area including the Terrell River lying north and east of a
line extending southeasterly from the privately maintained light
(F-G) at the mouth of Orchard Neck Creek to Buoy Fl G"31" in the
main channel and thence northeasterly to the southernmost tip of
Tuthill Point.
4. All of Tuthill Cove north and west of a line extending northeasterly
from the southernmost tip of Tuthill Point through Channel Buoy
N"4" to the shore at the Moriches Coast Guard Station (Moriches
CG No. 76).
5. All of Hart Cove and its tributaries north and west of a line
extending northeasterly from shore at the foot of Evergreen Avenue
(local landmarks).
6. All of Seatuck Cove and its tributaries north of a line extending
easterly from the southernmost tip of Havens Point to the mouth of
the canal known locally as Wetzels Creek, including all of Wetzels
Creek.
7. Also that area lying north and east of a line extending northeaster-
ly from the southeasternmost tip of Forge Point to Buoy Fl R"27" in
the main channel and thence easterly along the buoyed channel
through the bay to the highway bridge at Potunk Point including
.all of the buoyed channel, from May 1 to October 31, both inclusive.
Note: All reference points in the Town of Brookhaven (South Shore) taken
from U.S.C. & G.S. Nautical Chart 120-SC edition of 1964, except as
indicated as "local landmark".
Town of Brookhaven (North Shore)
Port Jefferson Harbor
1. All that area of Port Jefferson Harbor south and east of a line
extending southwesterly from the flashing light and bell on the
-------
TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN
Page 4 of 4
Town of Brookhaven (North Shore)
Port Jefferson Harbor (Continued)
jetty at the eastern side of the entrance to Port Jefferson
Harbor to the flashing red light on the jetty at the western
side of the harbor entrance and then continuing southerly to a
stone jetty at the shore near Buoy C"3" at the entrance to
Setauket Harbor.
Note: All reference points in the Town of Brookhaven (North Shore) taken
from U.S.C. & G.S. Chart #361 dated July 6, 1963.
R. Stewart Kilborne
Conservation Commissioner
By:
Dated: Albany, N.Y.
March 20, 1965
As Amended through
March 15, 1966
Quentin R. Bennett
Marine Fisheries Sanitarian
-------
C £ P Y
ORDER OF MODIFICATION
A Notice of a consolidated public hearing and a Complaint in
the above entitled proceedings having been duly served and the Res-
pondent, by GREENWALD, KOVNER and GOLDSMITH, his Attorneys, pursuant
to Part 76.4 of Chapter II of Title 10 of the Official Compilation
of the Codes, Rules and Regulations of the State of New York, having
waived such hearing and having stipulated with the Counsel of the
New York State Department of Health that all of the allegations of
the Complaint contained in paragraphs are true
and that facts exist upon which this Order may be predicated and that
the same might be made, filed and served,
NOW on reading and filing said Notice of Hearing and Complaint
and proof of service thereof and stipulation, and due deliberation
having been had, it is
ORDERED:
1. THAT said stipulation be and the same hereby is approved
and the facts thereof are found and the conclusions thereof are
arrived at.
2. THAT all Orders of the Water Pollution Control Board and
of the Commissioner of Health of the State of New York directed to
or against the Respondent be and they hereby are modified to provide
that the Respondent shall, and said Respondent is hereby ordered and
directed to, on and after January 2, 1967, cease and abate, and
thereafter keep abated all discharges of duck wastes and duck process-
ing wastes by him or through or from lands or facilities owned by him
or under his management or control into the waters of the State unless
said Respondent shall:
(a) On or before January 1, 1967, submit to the New York
State Department of Health, through the Suffolk County Health Depart-
ment, preliminary plans showing facilities for biological treatment
of all such wastes and/or effluents thereof to the extent that at
least 85% of the suspended solids and at least 85% of the biochemical
oxygen demand and a substantial portion of the phosphates thereof
and therein shall be removed and facilities for disinfecting such wastes
and/or waste effluents to the extent that the final effluent shall at
all times contain a chlorine residual of not less than one half part
per million after not less than 15 minutes contact time and a MPN of
coliform organisms not greater than 100 per 100 ml. in at least 90%
of the samples in a series thereof, provided that at no time may the
MPN of such organisms in said final effluent exceed 10,000 per 100 ml.
-------
(b) On or before August 1, 1967, submit final construction
plans, in approvable form, prepared by or under the direction of a duly
licensed professional engineer, for such facilities.
(c) On or before November 1, 1967, initiate construction of
such facilities.
(d) On or before April 30, 1968, cause construction of such
facilities to be completed.
(e) Thereafter maintain and operate said facilities in such
manner that they shall at all times meet the performance criteria set
forth in decretal provision 2(a) hereof and that the standards of no
waters of the State shall be contravened by reason of the wastes
aforesaid or their effluents.
3. THAT any and all permits for the discharge of wastes or waste
effluents into the waters of the State issued to the Respondent or to
his predecessors or assignors by or on behalf of the New York State
Department of Health or the Commissioner of Health of the State of New
York or the Water Pollution Control Board be and they hereby are modi-
fied, effective May 1, 1968, or upon default of performance of any of
the alternative decretal provisions hereof prior thereto, to refer and
relate to and permit only the discharge of waste effluents treated in
the facilities construction of which is hereby alternatively ordered.
DATED: Albany, New York
1966
HOLLIS S. INGRAHAM, M.D.
Commissioner of Health of the State
of New York
TO: WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION
GREENWAU), KOVNER & GOLDSMITH
(Attorneys for Respondent)
-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY
------- |