Proceedings: Conference In The Matter Of Pollution Of The Navigable Waters Of Moriches Bay And The Eastern Section Of Great South Bay And Their Tributaries. Patchogue, New York, September 20-22, 1966


PROCEEDINGS
Patchogue, New York
September 20-22,1966
Conference
In the matter of
Pollution of the Navigable
Waters of Moriches Bay
and the Eastern Section of
Great South Bay and their Tributaries
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration

-------
1-2
INDEX

STATEMENT OF:
PAGE:
Murray Stein (Opening Statement)

Paul DeFalco
13
Dr. Hollis S. Ingraham
88
H. Lee Dennlson
100
William L. Burns
115
Mark Abelson
117
Otis G. Pike (telegram)
127
Prank L, Panuzio
128
Ralph VanDerwerker
136
George Morrison
l4i
George Biderman (letter)
1M9
P. W. Montanari
152
Robert Hennigan
162
Edward Morette
247
David H. Wallace
251
Dr. George E. Leone
275
August Stout
295
Elizabeth M. Wallace
302
afternoon session
EXHIBITS
127
153j 253, 304,
307, 321

-------
3
Conference In the Matter of Pollution of
the Navigable Waters of Moriches Bay and the Eastern
Section of Qreat South Bay, Long Island, New York, con-
vened at 9:50 a.m., on Tuesday, September 20, 1966, at
Felice's Restaurant, Patchogue, New York.
PRESIDING:
Mr. Murray Stein, Assistant Commissioner
for Enforcement, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, Department of
the Interior
CONFEREES:
Mr. Dwight F. Metzler, Deputy Commissioner,
State of New York Department of Health,
Albany, New York
Mr. Lester M. Klashman, Regional Director,
Northeast Region, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, Department of the
Interior, Boston, Massachusetts

-------
3-A
PARTICIPANTS:
Paul DePalco, Project Director, Hudson-Champlain
and Metropolitan Coastal Comprehensive Water Pollution
Control Project, United States Department of the Interior,
Metuchen, New York
Dr. Hbllis S. Ingraham, State Health Commissioner,
Department of Health, State of New York
H. Lee Dennison, County Executive, Suffolk County,
New York
William L. Burns, Assemblyman, Seventh Assembly
District, State of New York
Mark Abelson, Regional Coordinator, United States
Department of the Interior
Frank L. Panuzio, Chief of Engineering Division
of New York District, Corps of Engineers
Ralph J. VanDerwerker, Program Director, Environ-
mental Engineering and Pood Protection, United States Public
Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
New York
George Morrison, Regional Shellfish Sanitation
Consultant, Shellfish Sanitation Branch, Division of
Environmental Engineering and Food Protection, United States
Public Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare

-------
3-B
PARTICIPANTS (CONTINUED):
P. W. Montanari, Assistant Commissioner, New York
State Conservation Department, Division of Water Resources
Robert D. Hennigan, Director of Water Resource
Services, State of New York Department of Health
Edward Morette, President, New York State Conserva-
tion Council
David H. Wallace, Director, Bureau of Marine
Fisheries, State of New York Conservation Department
Dr. George E. Leone, Commissioner, Suffolk County
Department of Health
August Stout, Jr., Chairman, Moriches Inlet
Stabilization Committee
Elizabeth M. Wallace, Director, Oyster Institute
of North America
Hon. Robert P. Kennedy, United States Senator from
the State of New York
J. M. Catterson, Jr., Chairman, Brookhaven Town
Oceanography Committee
Mrs. James R. Sherard, Vice President, League of
Women Voters, Town of Islip; Chairman, Water Resources
Committee, Suffolk County Council
E. E. Henkel, Representing The Suffolk County
Sewer Agency

-------
INDEX
STATEMENT OF:
Murray Stein (Opening Statement)
Paul DeFalco
Dr. Hollis S. Ingraham
H. Lee Dennison
William L. Burns
Mark Abelson
Otis G« Pike (telegram)
Prank L. Panuzio
Ralph VanDerwerker
George Morrison
George Biderman (letter)
F. W. Montanari
Robert Hennigan
Edward Morette
David H. Wallace
Dr, George E. Leone
August Stout
Elizabeth M. Wallace
AFTERNOON SESSION
EXHIBITS
PAGE:
4
13
88
100
115
117
127
128
136
l4l
149
152
162
247
251
275
295
302
127
153, 253, 304,
307, 321

-------
3
Conference In the Matter of Pollution of
the Navigable Waters of Moriches Bay and the Eastern
Section of Great South Bay, Long Island, New York, con-
vened at 9:50 a.m., on Tuesday, September 20, 1966, at
Felice*s Restaurant, Patchogue, New York.
PRESIDING:
Mr. Murray Stein, Assistant Commissioner
for Enforcement, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, Department of
the Interior
CONFEREES:
Mr. Dwight P. Metzler, Deputy Commissioner,
State of New York Department of Health,
Albany, New York
Mr. Lester M. Klashman, Regional Director,
Northeast Region, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, Department of the
Interior, Boston, Massachusetts

-------
PARTICIPANTS:
Paul DeFalco, Project Director, Hudson-Champlain
and Metropolitan Coastal Comprehensive Water Pollution
Control Project, United States Department of the Interior,
Metuchen, New York
Dr. Hollis S, Ingraham, State Health Commissioner,
Department of Health, State of New York
H. Lee Dennison, County Executive, Suffolk County,
New York
William L, Burns, Assemblyman, Seventh Assembly
District, State of New York
Mark Abelson, Regional Coordinator, United States
Department of the Interior
Frank L. Panuzio, Chief of Engineering Division
of New York District, Corps of Engineers
Ralph J, VanDerwerker, Program Director, Environ-
mental Engineering and Pood Protection, United States Public
Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
New York
George Morrison, Regional Shellfish Sanitation
Consultant, Shellfish Sanitation Branch, Division of
Environmental Engineering and Food Protection, United States
Public Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare

-------
3-B
PARTICIPANTS (CONTINUED):
F. W. Montanari, Assistant Commissioner, New York
State Conservation Department, Division of Water Resources
Robert D. Hennigan, Director of Water Resource
Services, State of New York Department of Health
Edward Morette, President, New York State Conserva-
tion Council
David H, Wallace, Director, Bureau of Marine
Fisheries, State of New York Conservation Department
Dr. George E. Leone, Commissioner, Suffolk County
Department of Health
August Stout, Jr., Chairman, Moriches Inlet
Stabilization Committee
Elizabeth M. Wallace, Director, Oyster Institute
of North America
Hon. Robert P. Kennedy, United States Senator from
the State of New York
J. M, Catterson, Jr., Chairman, Brookhaven Town
Oceanography Committee
Mrs. James R. Sherard, Vice President, League of
Women Voters, Town of Islip; Chairman, Water Resources
Committee, Suffolk County Council
E. E. Henkel, Representing The Suffolk County
Sewer Agency

-------
3-C
PARTICIPANTS (CONTINUED):
Emanuel H. Licht, Representing the Feather
Cooperative Marketing Association
Nelson D. Houck, General Manager, Long Island
Duck Farmers Cooperative, Inc.
William F, Cosulich, Consulting Engineer, Syosset,
New York
Maurice Barbash, Citizens' Committee for the
Fire Island National Seashore
Hugh Mercer, General Manager, Bluepoints Company,
Inc., West Sayville, Long Island, New York
Edwin S. Furman, President, Southampton Town
Baymen's Association, Inc.
Dr. George H. Vanderborgh, Sr., Representing the
Oyster Institute of North America and the Long Island Shell-
fish Farmers, Inc.
Adrian Hoek, Representing the Great South Bay
Baymen's Association
Robert Vojvoda, Supervisor, Town of Riverhead
Charles R. Dominy, Supervisor, Town of Brookhaven

-------
3-D
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE:
Mrs. George Baker, League of Women Voters,
Bellport, Long Island
Harry Bedell, Mayor, Village of Bellport
Quentin Bennett, New York State Conservation
Department
Ronald Blau, Village Clerk, Patchogue
Robert Branges, National Park Service, United
States Department of the Interior
Dr. Harry Brenowitz, Adelphi University,
Adelphia Institute of Marine Science
John S. Bucalo, President, Northern Brookhaven
Civic Council
Charles Bueltman, Soap and Detergent Association
John Borak, Moriches, Box 67
Edward Buyer, League of Women Voters, Township of
Islip
Stanley Chornoma, Duck Parmer
Coolidge Churchill, Adelphi University
Robert Clark, Attorneys for Bluepoints Company,
VanBrunt & Clark
Morris Colen, United States Corps of Army
Engineers, New York District
Romeo Contois, Pish and Game, Ticonderoga, New York
P, Costigan, Assemblyman

-------
3-E
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED):
Lloyd Corwin, Crescent Duck Farm
George Cowherd, Interstate Sanitation Commission
Samuel Cross, Suffolk County Department of Public
Works
Herbert Davids, Suffolk County Department of Health
Robert H. Davis, United States Pish and Wildlife
Service, Division of River Basin Studies
Edward DePiazzy, DePiazzy Duck Farm, Inc.
L. A. Devenpeck, Suffolk County
Sumner Dole, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of
Sport Fisheries and Wildlife
C. V. Doncaster, Long Island State Park Commission
Frank Deak, Duck Farm, Riverhead, New York
L. C. Eckart, Suffolk County Department of Public
Works
Barney Evans, Suffolk County Department of Public
Works
Gary A. Evans, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and
Wildlife
Mickey T. Field, C&R Duck Farm, Westhampton, Long
Island
H. B. Flower, Frank M. Flower St Sons, Bayville,
Long Island
John M. Flynn, Suffolk County Health Department

-------
3-F
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED):
Jack Foehrenbach, New York State Conservation
Department
John Foley, Township of Brookhaven
Richard Forster, State Health Department
Bruce Foxworthy, United States Geological Survey,
Water Resources Division
Anthony Gaeta, Administrative Assistant to
Congressman Murphy
Howard Gates, New York State Health Department
T. R, Glenn, Interstate Sanitation Commission
William Graner, Suffolk County Health Department
Seymour Gross, Delaware River Basin Commission
Walter G. Harris, Fish and Wildlife Service,
Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife
John E, Harrison, New York State Health Department
Charles Hart, Shellfish, Inc.
Merrill Hohman, Hudson-Champlain Project, Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration, United States
Department of the Interior
Mrs. W, Hetzel, Locust Grove Poultry Farms
Dorothy Howlett, League of Women Voters, Yardley,
Pennsylvania
Herbert Howlett, Delaware River Basin Commission

-------
3-G
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED);
H. T. Hubbard, Whitebrook Duck Farm, Riverhead,
Long Island
R. B. Hudson, President School Board, Greenport,
Long Island
Leo Johnson, Civil Defense, Patchogue, Long Island
Malcolm Kallus, Department of the Interior,
Eastern Operations Office, Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration
R. M. Kammerer, Commissioner of Public Works,
Suffolk County
Jack Kanas, Beacon Feeds, Cayuga, New York
Joseph Karban, United States Department of the
Interior, National Park Service
F. Kittrell, TA&I Section, Sanitary Engineering
Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
Halvor Koch, Conservation Department, State of
New York
Bernard Kovner, Long Island Duck Farmers
Cooperative, Inc.
Adam Kanoes, East Moriches, Long Island
Victor Kostuk, Long Island Duck Farmers Coopera-
tive, Inc.
Mrs. D. Larson, League of Women Vdters, New York
State

-------
3-H
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED);
W. M. Lawrence, New York State Conservation
Department
Leszkowiecz 	, Duck Farm, Brookhave, Long Island
Paul Licht, Feather Sales Agency, Speonk, Long
Is land
John Like, Counsel, Citizens Committee, Fire
Island National Seashore
Mrs, M, Like, Citizens Committee of National
Seashore
Frank Lomaga, Springwater Duck Farm
Harold Lukert, Locust Grove Poultry Farm
Donald MacCormack, League of Women Voters, Township
of Islip
J. MacMillan, President, Long Island Fishermen's
Association
J, McCabe, Consulting Engineer, Garden City,
New York
Louis McLean, Engineer, Township of Brookhaven
D. McNicol, Fire Island Sea Clam Company, Inc.
Joseph Monkoski, National Park Service
Thomas Mulligan, Hydroscience, Inc., Leonia,
New Jersey
Anna Pachalk, Duck Farmer, Speonk, Long Island

-------
3-1
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED);
Edward Pellaetis, Congressman Murphy's Office
Howard Phillips, C&R Duck Hatching
Cornelius Poillon, Long Island Fishermen's
Association
Harry Reeves, Southampton Baymen's Association,
Xnc.
Robert Reid, Councilman, Town of Brookhaven
Paul Resnick, Hudson-Champlain Project, Project
Information Officer, Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, Department of the Interior
W, Reynolds, Mayor, Westhampton Beach
Henry Schmidt, National Park Service, Fire Island
National Seashore
Walter Seamaschunk, Duck Farmer, Riverhead, New York
Robert Sheppard, Suffolk County Health Department
Mrs. Robert Sheridan, Assistant to Supervisor
Charles Dominy, Town of Brookhaven
Nelson Slager, Fire Island Fisheries, Inc.
Alvin Stein, Feather Sales Agency of Long Island,
Speonk
Randolph Stelle, New York State Conservation
Department, Division of Water Resources
Keith Stewart, Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, Cincinnati, Ohio

-------
3-J
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED):
Gerald Suloff, Plre Island National Seashore,
Department of the Interior
John Suydam, National Boatmen's Association,
Lindenhurst, New York
Stanley Thuma, Baymen's Association, Great South Bay
H. S. Tubiaah, Branch of Shellfisheries, Washington,
D. C.
Robert Tuck, Feed Manufacturer
Alfred Tucker, New York State Conservation Department
Harold Udell, Department of Conservation and Water-
ways, Hempstead, Long Island
G. Vanderborgh, Jr., Long Island Shellfish Farmers
Robert Villa, Suffolk County Department of Health
David Wallace, New York Conservation Department
Kenneth Walker, Deputy Project Director, Hudson-
Champlain Project, Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-
tion, Department of the Interior
Wesley J. Warner, Riverhead, New York
Olin Warner, Duck Grower, Calverton, New York
Harry Wartur, Leonard Wegman Company, Engineers
J. R. Welker, Southampton College of LIV
R. E. Weston, League of Women Voters, Bellport,
Long Island

-------
3-K
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED):
Mrs. Lucy Whittaker, Oyster Institute
Leroy Wilcox, Duck Parmer
J. C. Willis, Islip, New York
R. P. Wilson, Oakdale, Long Island, Adelphia
University
Robert Wuesterfeld, United States Corps of
Army Engineers, New York District

-------
4
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
PROCEEDINGS
OPENING STATEMENT
BY
MR. MURRAY STEIN
MR. STEIN: The conference is open.
This conference in the matter of pollution of
the navigable waters of Moriches Bay and the eastern
section of Great South Bay and their tributaries (Long
Island, New York) Involving the State of New York and the
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, is being
held under the provisions of Section 10 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act.
Under the provisions of the Act, the Secretary
of the Interior is authorized to call a conference of this
type when he finds that substantial economic injury results
from the inability to market shellfish or shellfish products
in Interstate commerce because of pollution subject to
abatement under the Federal Act, and action of Federal,
State, or local authorities.

-------
5
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
I think today we are witnessing one of the first
cases brought by the Secretary of the Interior — we have
not been in the Department of the Interior too long --
and certainly the first case brought under the shellfish
provision.
While we have had vast experience in dealing
with pollution cases under other provisions of the Act, the
shellfish provisions of the Act were enacted in the last
amendment in 1965. This is the first time that these
provisions have been invoked.
The purpose of the conference is to bring to-
gether the State water pollution control agency, representa-
tives of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,
and other Interested parties to review the existing situa-
tion, the progress which has been made, to lay a basis for
future action by all parties concerned, and to give the State,
localities, and industries an opportunity to take any
indicated remedial action under State and local law.
The conference technique is rather an old one.
It is used informally by many State agencies in the normal
conduct of their business in the field of water pollution
control, and I know it has been used extensively and
successfully by New York. The conference system was proposed
by the Uftited States Supreme Court as long ago as 1921 in

-------
6
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
the famous case of New York versus New Jersey, Involving
interstate pollution. I would like to quote from this
decision:
"We cannot withhold the suggestion,
inspired by the consideration of this case,
that the grave problem of sewage disposal
by the large and growing population living
on the shores of New York Bay is one more
readily to be most wisely solved by coopera-
tive study and by conference and mutual con-
cession on the part of representatives of the
States so vitally interested in it than by
proceedings in any court, however constituted."
We strongly support the conference technique
and we measure our success by the problems which are solved
at the conference table, rather than in court.
I think between 1921 and 1966 this is particu-
larly applicable, because now we have this large and growing
population, not only on New York Bay, but on Moriches Bay
and Great South Bay. I think this is Just a question of
population, industry and civilization moving forward.
As specified in Section 10 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, the Secretary of the Interior has
notified the official State water pollution control agency,

-------
7
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
which is the New York State Department of Health, of this
conference. This conference is between the official
State agency and the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration. The New York State Department of Health
may bring whomever it wishes to the conference and have them
participate in the conference. However, only the representa-
tives of the official State agency and the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration constitute the conferees.
The State of New York has designated as its
conferee for this conference Mr. Dwight Metzler, Deputy
Commissioner, New York State Department of Health. Mr.
Lester M, Klashman of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration's Northeast Regional Office, with head-
quarters in Boston, Massachusetts, has been designated as
conferee for the Federal Government.
My name is Murray Stein. I am from Washington,
D» C., headquarters of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration,
At this point I would like to sqy I am delighted
to see both of these conferees, because the professionals
in water pollution control for many years worked in a
relatively small gambit# and 1 am surrounded by tw6 pro*s,
I have worked with both of these men in varitmir parti of the
country since the end of World war II, when we first began

-------
8
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
to get active in water pollution control. I am really
delighted to be with them again in Long Island.
Both the State and Federal governments have
responsibilities in dealing with water pollution control
problems. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act declares
that the States have primary rights and responsibilities
for taking action to abate and control pollution. Con-
sistent with this, we are charged by law to encourage the
States in these activities.
At the same time, the Secretary of the Interior
is charged by law with specific responsibilities in the
field of water pollution control in connection with pollu-
tion of interstate and navigable waters. The Federal Water
Pollution Control Act provides that pollution of interstate
or navigable waters, whether the matter causing or contribut-
ing to the pollution is discharged directly into such waters,
or reaches such waters after discharge into a tributary,
which endangers the health or welfare of any persons, shall
be subject to abatement.
The October 1965 amendments to the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act additionally empower the Secretary
of the Interior to initiate enforcement procedures whenever
he finds that substantial economic injury results from the
inability to market shellfish or shellfish products in

-------
9
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
interstate commerce because of pollution of interstate or
navigable waters, and the action of Federal, State or local
authorities.
This conference on pollution of the navigable
waters of Moriches Bay and the eastern section of Great
South Bay and their tributaries, as I have mentioned, is the
first to be held under these shellfish provisions of the Act.
The conference will cover the effects on inter-
state commerce caused by pollution of the shellfish beds in
Moriches Bay and the eastern section of Great South Bay.
We expect the conference will be useful in providing a clear
picture of the problem, delineating the progress which has
already been accomplished, and in indicating what needs to be
done to correct the pollution problem in these navigable
waters.
All the conferees will be called upon to make
statements. The conferees, in addition, may call upon
participants they have invited to the conference to make
statements. At the conclusion of each statement, the
conferees and myBelf will be given an opportunity to comment
or ask questions. This procedure has in the past proven
effective in developing the problem or reaohing equitable
solutions.
I would like to point out we do not entertain

-------
10
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
comments or questions from the floor. If we did, we would
have a mass meeting, and probably be here much longer than
you would want us to be here, so save your comments for
your statements. You will be given a full opportunity to
make a statement on any portion of the problem you think
relevant. We are here to hear you fully and give it every
consideration.
At the end of all the statements, we will have
a discussion among the conferees and try to arrive at a
basis of agreement on the facts of the situation presented
here. Then we will attempt to summarize the conference
orally, giving the conferees, of course, the right to amend
or modify the summary.
Under the Federal law, the Secretary of the
Interior is required at the conclusion of the conference to
prepare a summary of it which will be sent to all the
conferees. The summary, according to law, must include the
following points:
1.	Occurrence of pollution of navigable
waters subject to abatement under the Federal Act.
2.	Adequacy of measures taken toward
abatement of pollution; and,
3.	Nature of delays, if any, being en-
countered in abating the pollution.

-------
11
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
The Secretary is also required to make recom-
mendations for remedial action if such recommendations are
indicated.
Now, a word about the procedure governing the
»
record of the conference. A record and verbatim transcript
of the conference is being made by Mr. A1 Zimmer. This is
made for the purpose of aiding us in preparing a summary,
and also providing a complete record of what is said here.
We will make copies of the summary and transcript
available to the official water pollution control agency
of New York.
We have found that, generally, it Is best that
people who wish transcripts should request them through
their State agency, rather than come directly to the Federal
Government. The reason for this is that we would prefer
people who are interested in the problem to follow their
normal relations in dealing with the State agency rather
than the Federal Government on these matters, when the
conference has been concluded. This has worked successfully
In the past and we will be most happy to make this material
available to New York for distribution.
I would suggest that all speakers and participants
other than the conferees making statements come to the
lectern and Identify .themselves for purposes of the record.

-------
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
Also, if you have any prepared statements, it
would be appreciated if you gave copies to the conferees
and the reporter before making your statement. On this
procedure, the first order of priority in making your
*
statement available is to the reporter. This can be quite
a chore by the end of the day if you do not have those
statements to follow, and you have to take every word down.
So, in order to expedite this, we would appreci-
ate any written statements being given first to the
reporter and then to the conferees.
With that, we would like to call on Mr. Klashman,
the Federal conferee.
Mr. Klashman.
MR. KLASHMAN: Thank you, Mr. Stein.
Mr. Paul DePalco, Project Director for the
Hudson -Champlain and Metropolitan Coastal Comprehensive
Water Pollution Control Project, with headquarters at
Metuchen, New Jersey, will make the first presentation for
the Federal Government.
Mr. DePalco.

-------
13
Paul DePalco
STATEMENT OP PAUL DeFALCO, PROJECT
DIRECTOR, HUDSON-CHAMPLAIN AND METRO-
POLITAN COASTAL COMPREHENSIVE WATER
POLLUTION CONTROL PROJECT, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OP THE INTERIOR,
METUCHEN, NEW JERSEY
MR. DePALCOs I would like to enter the state-
ment in full Into the record. The conferees already have
copies of the statement, and I will read portions of it.
I. DESCRIPTION OF AREA
Geography
The area under consideration for this report
lies on the south shore of Long Island, New York. It con-
Blsts 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 Fatchogue Bay,
Be11port 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.

-------
14
Paul DePalco
Figure 1 shows the study area.
MR. STEIN: Mr. DePalco, I would like to point
out here, just at the start -- and this will apply to
everybody — the exhibits and maps in the transcript will
appear in black and white, not in color. It would be
helpful for everyone in making his presentation if he
avoided referring to color, when describing the exhibits,
if the exhibits should happen to be in color. When some-
one picks up the transcript it does not make much sense to
talk about the "green" portion of the map when the fellow
1b going to look at a black and white map.
MR. DePALCO: Thank you.
MR. STEIN: All right.
MR. DePALCO: Great South Bay and Moriches Bay
are separated from the Atlantic 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 included in this report is
eight miles long and two to four miles wide.

-------
Page Not
Available
Digitally

-------
Paul DeFalco
Population and Economy of the Area
16
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 inoreased from 44,522 to 114,7&0, 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*462.1 The population boom in Suffolk County
has continued, with estimates of 756,000 by 1963 and
950,000 by the end of 1965^. These figures indioate 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,
reoreational and agricultural. There are many summer homes
along the ocean and bay shores, and a number of publio 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 whioh con-
stitutes Fire Island National Seashore.

-------
17
Paul DePalco
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 County^. 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 streams discharging into
the bays under consideration.3 However, there is a large
groundwater reservoir under all of Long Island. Aocordlng
to the U. S. Geological Survey, there is a natural discharge
from this subsurface 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 from

-------
18
Paul DeFalco
the inlets.^
The main ciroulatlon in the two Bays appears to
result from the progressive nature of the tidal wave, which
because of the shallow depths and differing lengths of the
two bays causes hydraulic ourrents 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 indioated 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 persistent 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 move-
ment was due to the fact that Moriches Inlet was closed so
that the normal net tidal flow was westerly.5
During the summer, the prevailing winds are
light and westerly,^ inducing circulation patterns which
augment the normal tidal circulation. As a result, water

-------
19
Paul DeFalco
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 th©
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
4
of Great South Bay. The mean tidal range is 4.1 feet at
Fire Island Inlet and 2,9 feet at Moriches Inlet, and
decreases to 0.8 feet at Bellport and 0.5 at Mastio Beach.
Maximum reported storm tide (November 1950) at Fire Island
Inlet was SA feet above mean sea level.^
In general, this tidal circulation is sufficient

-------
20
Paul DeFalco
to prevent stratification 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.9j10•
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
6 Q
river estuaries.
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.^'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.
Ill. WATER USES IN THE AREA
Domestic Water Supply

-------
21
Paul DeFaloo
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 irrigation and for
operating duck farms. Almost 20 billion gallons of ground
¦water were withdrawn from Suffolk County's underground
reservoirs in 1956. 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 public, private and industrial wells is
returned to the ground."
Bat hlng
The waters of Morlohes and Great South Bays are
used extensively 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 uBed for bathing. In 1966, a portion of the sand
bar separating Great South Bay from the ocean was dedicated
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.

-------
Paul DeFalco
22
Finflshlng
The area serves as an important commercial
fishing source. In 1961, a total of 35^*000 pounds of fish
were landed in Great South Bay and Moriches and Shinnecock
Bays.1
Sport fishing is also very popular in the area.
Many deep sea fishing boats operate from the various marinas,
and private boats of all sizes are used for fishing.
Shellflshlng
Shellfish, primarily hard clams, are harvested
extensively from the area. In 1961, more than two million
\
pounds of shellfish were taken from the area. At one time,
the area supported an extensive oyster harvest, but in
recent years the crop of oysters has been reduoed and the
oyster is no longer a significant factor in the economy of
the area.
Boating
The dramatio increase in recreational boating

-------
23
Paul DePaXco
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 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 usage can be in the
12
order of 2-3 mgd. In some instances dry farming techniques
have been adopted in order to reduce the water requirements.

-------
Paul DePalco
24
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 sexverage systems, industrial operations,
recreational boats, and surface run-off and land drainage.
Duck Farms
There are 3^ duck farms, two of -which are
reportedly out of business, located on waters tributary to
Moriches, 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 I.
Table I
DUCK FARMS TRIBUTARY TO STUDY WATERS12
Yearly Duck
Location No.*	Owner	Production
Trib. to Bellport	Bay:
1	Gallo Brothers	250,000
2	Leskowicz	200,000
3	Carmen River Farm	200,000
Total to Bellport	Bay:	650,000

-------
Paul DeFalco
25
Table I (continued)
Yearly Duck
Location No.*	Owner	Production
Trib. to Moriches Bay:
4
Paul Choenoma
50,000
5
De Piazzy
100,000
6
Jucgllelewicz
150,000
7
Swift Stream Duck Farm
100,000
8
Borak Farm
100,000
9
Lukert
150,000
10
Hallock Brookside
120,000
11
Forge River Duck Farm
100,000
12
Harry A. Smith
50,000
13
Walter R. Smith Out
of busines
14
Robert H. Smith
60,000
15
Stanley Chornoma
80,000
16
Chi-Dux Duck Farm
90,000
17
Joseph Podlaski
50,000
18
Vigliotta & Son
60,000
19
Adam Soroka
50,000
20
Adam Kanas
60,000
21
Breezy Acres
60,000

-------
26
Paul DeFalco
Table I (continued)
Yearly Duck
Location No.*	Owner	Production
Trib. to Moriches Bay:
22	Zygmunt Babinskl	50,000
23	Chester Massley	50,000
2b 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 Dlst350,000
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 Bellport & Moriches Bays:	3*100,000
*As shown on Figure 1.
In large scale duck production, holding pens
and dikes are built across the stream or other bodies of
water and on the adjacent shore. The ducks move freely

-------
27
Paul DePalco
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
12
is retained 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 studies by the New York State Depart-
ment of Health are presented in Table II.
Table II
CHARACTERISTICS OF RAW DUCK FARM WASTES13'^'15
Ranges Reported
Characteristic	Ibs/day/lOOO 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 flows from duck farms
varies widely. A study by Gates^ in 1959 reported water

-------
28
Paul DeFalco
use varied from four to 96 gallons per duck. The same study
showed collform concentrations in the effluent ranged from
5.8 x 1C)6 to 58 x 10^ MPN per 100 ml. Cosulich ^ found
the water use at five selected farms ranged from 14 to 120
gallons per day per duck, and that collform concentrations
were of the same order of magnitude as reported by Gates.
No measurements have been made of the total
Waste loadings from duck farms. Table III presents estimated
ioada, based on the data cited above, and on duck production
figures shown in Table I. These loads were calculated on
fche basis of a nine month (March through November) duck
Production season and an average duck life of seven weeks.
Based on the data in Table III, the duck
Arming industry represents a source of 1^,000 lbs per day
B0DJ 3,300 lbs per day total nitrogen; 5.600 lbs per day
total phosphate; and 55,600 lbs per day of the suspended
8°llds in a total waste flow of 33 MOD. In addition, these
wastes contribute 25 million billion MPN collform per day
to the receiving waters. It is recognized that these loadings
®re 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

-------
Paul DeFalco
Table III
ESTIMATED LOADS FROM DUCK FARM WASTES
29



Ave. Due k
Flow
MPN
Tributary
No.
Yearly
Population
MGD
Coliform
To:
Farms
•Production
(1)
(2)
Per Day (3)
Bellport Bay
3
650,000
116,700
7.0
5 x IO15
Moriches Bay
29
2,450,000
439*800
26.4
20 x 1015
Study Area
32
3,100,000
556,500
33.4
25 x 1015
Loadings in Pounds per Day (4)
Tributary	Total Susp. Total Kjeldahl Total Soluble
To :
BOD Solids
Solids N
N
PO4

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 ooliform density of 20 x 10^/100 ml.
(4)	Based on.following waste characteristics in pounds per
1000 ducks per day:
BOD	25 Kjeldahl Nitrogen 8
Total Solids	160 Total Phosphate 10
Total Nitrogen	6 Soluble Phosphate 5
Suspended Solids 100

-------
30
Paul DeFalco
facilities were reported to be only partially effective in
removing settleable solids, and are not effective in removing
biochemical oxygen demand, nitrogen, phosphates and micro-
organisms. In addition, there were times when some farms
bypassed their treatment facilities.2*12
Industrial Wastes
Industrial waste discharges in the area emanate
from a poultry processing plant and a fabric finishing mill.
A study^ of duck:-processing wastes was made in
1964 at two plants on Long Island, one of whioh was reported
discharge its waste through ponds to an area of Moriches
B&y. The results of the 1964 study at this plant are
Presented in Table IV.
Table IV
CHARACTERISTICS OF RAW DUCK PROCESSING WASTES
Waste Flow, gallons per duck	24.3
BOD, lb. per 1000 ducks	43.2
Susp. solids, lb. per 1000 ducks	31,0
Conform, No. per 100 ml	56,800
During the four days of the study, the plant
Processed an average of 13*675 ducks per day. Table V

-------
31
Paul DeFalco
presents the estimated raw waste loads from this plant, using
this production figure and the data presented in Table IV.
Table V
ESTIMATED LOADINGS - RAW DUCK PROCESSING WASTES
Flow	BOD	Susp. Solids	Total Coliform
p;al/day	lbs/day	lbs /day	per day
332,000	590	420	2*5 x 10^
In 1964, the raw waste from this operation was
discharged to a settling pond prior to discharge to Moriches
Bay. No data are available 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 materials.
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 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

-------
32
Paul DeFalco
The only municipal waste source discharging to
the study area waters 1b that of the Village of Patchogue,
which has sanitary sewers and a 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
provide adequate treatment on completion of the work.-^ The
available data on this plant as of 1966 are presented in
Table VI.
Table VI
20
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	Patohogue
removal, settling, Creek
Sanitary	post-chlorination
Assuming a BOD of raw munioipal sewage equal to
0.17 lbs. per capita per day and 3<# removal by primary
treatment, the discharge from this plant represents a total
load of 600 lbs. per day of BOD which is five percent of that
attributed to the duclc farms.
Cesspools and Septic Tanks

-------
33
Paul DeFalco
The majority of the residents in the drainage
areas of the study waters dispose of domestic sanitary sewage
by individual cesspools or septic tanks. In areas of porous
soils having 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 percent of the individual wells in Center
Moriches were polluted. In areas of non-porous soile, cess-
pool and septic tank systems frequently overflow and the
waste becomes a part of the surface runoff.
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 i960 population data
for those communities lying within the drainage area under
consideration and south of Sunrise Highway. These communi-
ties, with the exception of a portion of Patchogue, rely on
individual sub-surfaoe disposal means to handle sanitary
wastes.
Table VII
MAJOR COMMUNITIES IN DRAINAGE AREA
South of Sunrise Highway

-------
Name
Bellport Village
Center Moriches
East Moriches
Mastic Beach
Mastic-Shirley
Patchogue Village
Paul DePaloo
I960 Population"
2,461
2,521
1,210
3,035
3,397
8,838
34
Means of Waste Disposal
Individual Sub-surface
Individual Sub-surface
Individual Sub-surface
Individual Sub-surface
Individual Sub-surface
(3,838 Ind, Sub-surface
(5,000 Patchogue Sewer
(Distrlot
Total i960 Population 21,462
Hence, of the 21,000 people 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 of approxi-
mately 0.3 feet per day.22 Although the movement of sub-
surf aoe 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 nitrogen and

-------
35
Paul DePalco
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 problems associated with the use of these
particular waters for recreational boating, studies else-
where have shown that recreational boating can represent 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 based activities. As part of the
intense agricultural aotivity 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 peroolate into the ground water

-------
36
Paul DePaloo
aquifers. Hence there is a transport of material, including
nutrient fertilizers 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 Bludges 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 pollutan
with the receiving water, and subsequent flushing of the
system.
„	OF	™ mater quality and uses
There have been many water quality studies in
Moriches Bay and the eastern portion of Great South Bay. Most
of the Be 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

-------
37
Paul DeFalco
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 pollution problem in Great South Bay
and Moriches Bay as follows:
"l. Great South Bay and Moriches Bay, Long
Island, N. Y.: Agricultural and domestic sewage
pollution.—A serious pollution problem which
caused the failure of a once prosperous shellfish
industry and lessened the reoreational use and
esthetic value of Great South, Moriches, and
Shinnecock Bays prompted the townB of Islip and
Brookhaven (Suffolk Co., N. Y.) to commission
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (W.H.O.I.) to
oonduct an analytical survey toward finding the
causative agents and their necessary remedial
measures. W.H.O.I, has conducted this survey since
1950.
"Usirig phosphorous concentration as an
index of pollution, W.H.O.I, investigators traced
the source of pollution to duok farms in Great South
and Moriches Bay. Studies of the bay's Irydrography
showed that the low flushing rates of the bays were
responsible for holding the pollutants long enough

-------
38
Paul DeFalco
"to permit massive proliferations of minute algae
which were deleterious to oysters. Dredging Moriches
Inlet open served to increase the 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
oase the organic nitrogen compounds from duok-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 investigation.
"Biologists studying this problem conolude 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 reoreational interests in the area
will be at the mercy of unpredictable and unoontrollable
meteorological conditions*
"In 1964 residents of Brookhaven and adjacent
towns complained again of foul era©lis emanating from
Great South Bay. In spite of a 4eoline in the duok
farming industry, pollution was great enough to hamper

-------
39
Paul DeFalco
"recreational use of parts of the Bay, and bubbles of
hydrogen sulfide 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
developments is in progress as of this date.******"^3
Many of the specific conditions described below
have been observed in the streams that receive duck farm
wastes in the area under consideration, 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
productivity 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

-------
40
Paul DeFalco
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 treatment processes of the
Village of Patchogue, or may reach the bay waters from In-
adequate private sewage disposal systems of individual homes
along the waterfront. Other bacteria are discharged from
recreational boats using these waters.
Bacterial pollution has oaused 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 of the report. According
to the Shellfisheries Management Unit of the State of New
York Conservation Department, harvesting of clams is prohibited
in 4,5^0 of the 10,775 acres of Moriches Bay and 1,600 of the
3,840 acres of Bellport 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

-------
41
Paul DeFalco
annually, with a dockslde value in excess of $2,500,000,
Thin unhLirvestable crop represents a major economic loss to
both the shellfish industry arid the area as a whole. Most
of the bacterial pollution that necessitates closing of
there shellfish waters appears to originate on the many duck:
fi-i-;.-.::. clustered along the streams of the area from Speonk
.Uver on the east to Carmans River on the west, as shown
on the map.
An additional 400 acres of shellfish beds in
Fatcheque Bay are closed to harvesting because of bacterial
pollution from tne Village of Patchogue sewage treatment
plant. Summer homes that may contribute to the bacterial
pollution of adjacent waters are located principally along
Harrow Bay which connects Moriches and Bellport Bays.
The economic loss in shellfish production is
not the only damage caused by bacteria. The streams on
','hich duck farms are situated, including their tidal sections
and adjacent waters, are subjected to bacterial pollution
that in some areas is a definite hazard to the health of
those coming in contact with these 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 particular species
of Salmonella bacteria known to cause human gastrointestinal

-------
b2
Paul DeFalco
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 nutrients, or fertilizers, 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 conven-
tional treatment plants provide only slight reduction 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 oontain 0.02 to 0.05 milligrams per liter (mg/1)
of phosphorus (as P), the enclosed Moriches and Bellport Bays
have been found to oontain from 0.02 to as much as 1.0 mg/l
of phosphorus. While the limiting oonoentration of phosphorus

-------
43
Paul DeFalco
for excessive algae growth in sea water has not been
established, the commonly accepted limiting concentration
In fresh water is 0.01 to 0.015 mg/l.
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/l 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 algae have
caused both economic and esthetic damage. In 1955 especially
and to a lesser degree in other years, a particular form
(Nannochloris atomius) of very minute suspended algae clogge<3
the gills of clams and markedly reduced their quality and
production in Moriches Bay, resulting in economic losses.
The suspended algae generally reduce esthetio enjoyment 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

-------
44
Paul DeFalco
dissolved oxygen content of these 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 algal
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 con-
centrations of suspended solids. In some cases, the con-
centration of suspended solids may be as much as one-half of

-------
45
Paul DePalco
that found in untreated domestic sewage. These suspended
solids include large proportions of decomposable organic
solid s.
Upon discharge to the receiving waters, the
suspended solids immediately impart a disagreeable grey
turbidity to the waters and diminish their esthetic appeal.
The heavier solids settle to the stream bottom in the vicinifc-M-
«Jr
of the points of discharge and form objectionable and harmful
sludge deposits. These sludge blankets cover and destroy th^
bottom aquatic 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 over-
lying waters, at times to below that needed for fish and oth^j,
aquatic life to survive. When complete depletion of oxygen
occurs, the further decomposition of organic matter produoes
obnoxious hydrogen sulfide gaB 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 olumps and rafts.
The lighter suspended solids are carried down-
stream 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

-------
46
Paul DeFalco
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.
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 Commission, conducts a program
of classification of State waters. Such a program delineates
the best usage for the waters and establishes applicable 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 classifications 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,

-------
47
Paul DeFalco
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 recognition
of the lack of satisfactory methods for the treatment of duclc
farm wastes.
In January 1954, a comprehensive plan was issued
for the abatement of pollution from the waters of the Great
South Bay - Easterly Section Drainage 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

-------
48
Paul DeFalco
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 to this report, submission of preliminary plains
for biological treatment would be required on or before
January 1, 1967. Such treatment would be required to provide
at least 85$ removal of suspended solids and BOD, removal of
a substantial portion of the phosphorus, and effective dis-
infection 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 under-
taken 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 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*

-------
4 9
Paul DeFalco
a Special Waste Disposal District was established in the Town
of Southampton to construct a treatment plant to abate pollu-
tion from several duclc farms. The project was determined to
be eligible for financial assistance under the Construction
Grants Program of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act ar*<3
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,^+00 and a request was made for a final payment
$2,350 by the Federal Government. However, an inspection by
the Public Health Service immediately after the 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 the 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 Committ^
on Natural Resources, The 1959 Report of this committee

-------
50
Paul DeFalco
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 Depart-
ment of Health received an Interim report on a comprehensive
sewerage study for the five westerly towns of Suffolk County.
This report suggested the creation of two sewage districts
to collect, treat, and dispose of water-borne waste. The
preliminary 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.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The navigable waters of Moriches Bay and the

-------
51
Paul DePalco
easterly end of Great South Bay receive the discharge of
wastes from extensive duck farms, municipal and domestic
sewerage systems, industrial operations, recreational 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 closures 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 subject to enforcement measures under the provisions
of Section 10 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended.
4.	In addition to constituting a health hazard via
shellfish, the bacterial contamination of these waters con-
stitutes 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 production 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.

-------
52
Paul DeFalco
5.	The major sources of bacteria, solids and
nutrients to these waters are the extensive duck growing
farms lining the shores of a number of tributary streams.
Although these farms do provide settling ponds, the existing
treatment facilities do not provide effective removal or
control for BOD, nutrients and bacteria and are only partially
effective in removing settleable solids. Other known sources
of pollution 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 contributing
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 siltation 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 classi-
fied and water quality standards have been adopted by the
New York State Department of Health, the agency having legal

-------
53
Paul DeFalco
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. Modification of these orders to incorporate new
abatement requirements and time schedules is currently
under way.
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 requires 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 3hall 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 collform organisms not greater than 100
per 100 ml in at least 9<$ of the samples in a series thereof,

-------
54
Paul DeFalco
provided that at no time may the MPN of such organisms in the
final effluent exceed 10,000 per 100 ml. Design and construc-
tion of facilities to accomplish the above treatment should
be in accordance with the following time schedule included
in the New York State Order of Modification:
a.	Preliminary plans for treatment to be
submitted on or beofre 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, 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,
substantial 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 distrlots to collect and

-------
55
Paul DeFalco
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
Ij 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.
That concludes the report.

-------
56
Paul DeFalco
MR. STEIN: I assume that you want the entire
report, Including the charts, in the record as well?
MR. DeFALCO: Yes, I would appreciate it.
MR. STEIN: Without objection, that will be done.
(The Appendix to the Report is as follows:
VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY
1.	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.	Hudson-Champlain Project Basic Data Book.
U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration, Hudson-Champlain and
Metropolitan Coastal Comprehensive Water Pollution Control
Project. Unpublished, based on U. S, Geological Survey
Surface Water Records, 1966.
4.	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,

-------
57
Paul DePalco
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.	Rvt:h#»r. J. H.; Vaccaro. R. P.; Hurlburt,
E. M.; Yantch, C. S.; and Guillard, R. R. L. Report on
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.

-------
58
Paul DePalco
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) 1964.
11.	Hoffman, J. F. and Lubke, E. R. Ground
Water Levels and their 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 Farms. Report for Suffolk County,
New York, Department of Health, 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, C. D. Treatment of Long Island Duck
Farm Wastes. Water Pollution Control Board, New York State
Department of Health, 1959.
17.	Morris, Grover L. Duck-Processing Waste.
Public Health Service Publication No. 999-WP-31* July 1965.
18.	Report on Water Pollution Control, New York-
New Jersey Metropolitan Area. Federal Security Agency,
Public Health Service, Division of Water Pollution Control,

-------
59
Paul DePalco
North Atlantic Drainage Basins Office, July 1951.
19.	Comprehensive Plan for Abatement of Pollu-
tion, Great South Bay - Easterly Section. Water Pollution
Control Board, New York State Department of Health, January
195**.
20.	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 State Water Resources Planning Commission,
July 1963.
23.	Restoring the Quality of Our Environment.
Report of the Environmental Pollution Panel, President's
Science Advisory Committee, The White House, November 1965.
* * *
COPY
TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON
NEW YORK STATE CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT
SHELLFISH SANITATION AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
OAKDALE, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK H769

-------
Paul DeFalco
TOWN OP SOUTHAMPTON
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 responsible 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 Sanita-
tion 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 ADJACENT TO THE TOWN OF
SOUTHAMPTON, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK.

-------
Paul DePalco
TOWN OP SOUTHAMPTON
The shellfish lands within the County of
Suffolk, Town of Southampton, 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 condi-
tion that shellfish thereon shall not be taken for use as
food, and such lands are designated uncertified (closed)
areas.
Town of Southampton
Moriches Bay
1. 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 Wetzel's Creek.
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 Quantuck Canal.
3. That area of Speonk Cove north and west of a line
extending northeasterly from the southernmost tip

-------
Paul DeFalco
TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON
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 landmark).
4. Also that area lying north and east of a line ex-
tending northeasterly from the southeasternmost
tip of Forge Point to Buoy F1 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 31s both inclusive.
Quantuck Bay
1.	Ail mainland creeks and canals at Quogue except
Quogue Canal.
2.	Quantuck Creek north of the Montauk Highway.
Shlnnecock 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.
Notes All reference points in the above areas in the

-------
63 ~6li
Paul DeFalco
TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON
Town of Southampton taken from U.S.C. & G.S. Nautical
Chart 120-SC edition of 1964, except aa 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 Ifey Ground
Cove, from May 1 to October 31* both inclusive.
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 northwesterly from the northern
end of the breakwater to the southeastern corner of
the 1 last white house at the southern end of East
Harbor Drive at North Haven (owned in January 19^5
by J. B. Carr) and east of the highway bridge known

-------
Paul DeFalco
TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON
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."
Peconlc 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 F1 R"6" and
thence northerly to Sims Point at Fanning Beach
(local landmarks).
2.	All rivers, creeks and canals tributary to Flanders
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

-------
66
Paul DePalco
TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON
#363> dated August 31» 1964, except as indicated as "local
landmark."
Atlantic Ocean
1. All areas of the Atlantic Ocean in the Town of
Southampton are certified (open) for the taking of
surf clams only.
R. Stewart Kilborne
Conservation Commissioner
By:
Dated:	Quentin R. Bennett
Albany, N. Y.	Marine Fisheries Sanitarian
March 20, 1965
As amended through
March 15* 1966
* # #
COPY
TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN
NEW YORK STATE CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT
SHELLFISH SANITATION AND ENGINEERING SERVICES
OAKDALE, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK 11769

-------
67
Paul DePalco
TOWN OP BROOKHAVEN
NOTICE TO ALL SHELLFISH HARVESTERS
The following Is a Statement of the Sanitary Condi-
tion 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 PROM WORKING IN ANY AREAS THAT ARE CLOSED
TO THE TAKING OP SHELLFISH. You may not work in any of
these closed areas without first obtaining proper permits
from this Department. The Conservation Department holds
you responsible 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 Con-
servation Department and obtain a listing of any areas that
may be closed to sheiifishing in that town.

-------
68
Paul DePalco
TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN
NOTICE OF CONDITION OF ALL SHELLFISH GROUNDS LOCATED
WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN, SUFFOLK
COUNTY, NEW YORK.
The shellfish lands within the County of Suffolk,
T )wn of Brookhaven, except those listed hereafter, are in
such sanitary condition 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 designated 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.
2.	That area of Patchogue Bay, and all adjacent
creeks and canals, lying north and west of a line

-------
69
Paul DePalco
TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN
extending southeasterly from a privately maintained
light (F1 Q"B") at the end of the bulkhead forming
the entrance to the canal and boat basin at the Blue
Point (Corey Creek) to Buoy N"4" in the channel
leading to Patchogue Creek, and continuing north-
easterly 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 bulkhead extremities on or near which the lights
are located will serve as markers for the lines of
closure.)
Beiiport Bay
1. That area north and east of a line extending easterly
from the flagstaff at the Beiiport Yacht Club at
the dock at the foot of Beiiport Lane in Beiiport
to Black Buoy F1 0"5M in the main channel, and
continuing southeasterly along the main channel to
Red Buoy F1 R"12,t near Smith Point, and thence

-------
70
Paul DePalco
TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN
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 an<3 a line from
shore to shore passing due north and south through
Buoy PI G'T?" 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.
2.	That area north and west of a line extending

-------
71
Paul DeFalco
TOWN OP BROOKHAVEN
northeasterly from Masury Point to the privately
maintained light (PI 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.
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 PI G"31" in the main
channel and thence northeasterly to the southernmost
tip of Tuthill Point.
All of Tuthill Cove north and west of a line extending
northeasterly from the southernmost tip of Tuthill
Point through Channel Buoy NM4fr to the shore at the
Moriches Coast Guard Station (Moriches CG No. 76).
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).
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 Wetzel*

-------
72
Paul DeFalco
TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN
Creek.
7. Also that area lying north and east of a line
extending northeasterly from the southeasternmost
tip of Forge Point to Buoy F1 Rl,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 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.

-------
73
Paul DePalco
TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN
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 Kllborne
Conservation Commissioner
Dated •	gy•
Albany, N.Y.	Quentin R. Bennett
March 20, 1965	Marine Fisheries Sanitarian
As Amended through
March 15, 1966
# # *
COPY
ORDER OF MODIFICATION
A Notice of a consolidated public hearing and a
Complaint in the above entitled proceedings having been
duly Berved and the Respondent, 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

-------
74
Paul DeFalco
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 aforesaid be and the same
hereby is approved and the facts therein are found and the
conclusions therein are arrived at.
2.	THAT all Orders of the Water Pollution Control
Board 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, 1967j cease and
abate, and thereafter keep abated all discharges of duck
wastes and duck processing wastes by him or through or from
landB 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

-------
75
Paul DePalco
the New York State Department of Health, through the
Suffolk County Health Department, preliminary plans
showing facilities for biological treatment of all such
wastes and/or effluents thereof to the extent that at least
&5% of the suspended solids and at least 85# of the bio-
chemical oxygen demand and a substantial portion of the
phosphates thereof and therein shall be removed and facili-
ties 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 9Q£ 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 construc-
tion of such facilities to be completed.
(e)	Thereafter maintain and operate said

-------
76
Paul DeFalco
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
GREENWALD, KOVNER & GOLDSMITH
(Attorneys for Respondent)

-------
77
Paul DeFalco
MR. STEIN: Are there any comments or questions?
Mr. Metzler?
MR, METZLER: As you know, Paul, I am just
getting acquainted with some of these waters here, so there
are a few gaps in this report as far as my own knowledge is
concerned that I would like to know a little more about.
First, you mentioned the effect which salinity
has in the Bay. What is the level? What is the variation
in the level of chlorides in Moriches Bay?
MR. DePALCO: Well, you have from the upper head-
waters as little as practically background to zero level
of chlorides to as much as 30*000 parts near the inlet area,
where you have almost fresh sea water. You have a complete
variety of chloride levels progressing across the Bay.
MR. METZLER: How does this vary? Is it day-to-day,
or seasonally? Are they seasonal?
MR. DePALCO: There will be seasonal variations in
terms of your surface water runoff. These will be more
effectively felt in the upper headwater areas, where more
fresh water essentially dilutes the chlorides coming in.
As you get drought conditions, you have the reverse happening.
MR. METZLER: You made an estimate of two and a
half million dollars damage to the shellfish industry. I am
hopeful to hear some more testimony from the folks who

-------
78
Paul DePalco
actually work in this area a little later, but can you tell
me the basis for that?
MR, DeFALCO: This is based on the average
production figures in the area, the average productivity of
the given acreage, the amount of closed acreage, and the
average price at the dock.
Now, this was, to say the least, a conservative
estimate, because the impact on the economy is estimated at
some ten times that in studies that were conducted down in
Florida.
MR. METZLER: A question with respect to the
conclusion No. 8 here.
That conclusion states that pollution has not
been abated, and certainly it has not; but if all of the
organic load on the Bay had been eliminated, would this have
corrected this condition?
MR. DeFALCO: It would have corrected a substantial
portion of the condition.
There is no question that the sludge deposits that
are in the Bay are also a major contributing factor to the
present condition, that the carry-over from the past, shall
we say —
MR. METZUER: What happens to the nutrients there,
whether they are effectively flushed out or whether the
cycle of algae nutrients just keeps on going for an

-------
Paul DeFalco
indefinite period. That is the reason for my question.
MR. DePALCO: Well, the cycle will continue for
some time, unless we increase the flushing capacity of the
Bay, this possibly by enlargements of the inlets.
There are several solutions required, not just
the treatment at the source. The treatment at the source
would eliminate the problem as of now, but we have to carry
over the problem from the past. We have to remove the past
damage, This can possibly be accomplished by a dredging
program.
Some of this is currently under way, I understand,
in Moriches Bay, by the county.
It would also add to the situation if we could
increase the flushing capacity of the area by increasing the
size of the inlets.
It is indeed a complicated problem.
MR. METZLER: Well, right on this point, your
Recommendation No. 6 is that the pollution is further
complicated by the hydrographic problems and hydrographic
conditions. I assume this refers to the lack of flushing
that now occurs?
MR. DePALCO: That is correct.
MR. METZLER: Do you make a specific recommenda-
tion for Increasing this flushing action?

-------
80
Paul DeFalco
MR. DePALCO: Well, we think that there should
be some studies along this line to see if this could be
done. Yes. There would be value to this.
MR. METZLER: One final question: I am very
much interested in some of the information that we have
been reading in the public press lately about the removal
of phosphates and this new breakthrough, so I am especially
interested in the comment on Page 23 here that:
"Current technology permits the design of
treatment plants capable of removing these
elements..."
and there you have referred to both phosphorus and nitrogen
from sewage and industrial wastes.
I wonder what kind of treatment processes you
might have in mind.
MR. DePALCO: Basically, what we are referring to
is that we know we can remove phosphates by chemical treat-
ment, by chemical coagulation.
There also has been some recent work done down in
the Texas-Oklahoma area which indicates that modification of
the operation of an activated sludge plant might also give
Increased removals of phosphates. This is additional work
that is under way.
With reference to nitrogen, we were essentially

-------
81
Paul DePalco
referring to the current carbon adsorption technique as
one of the possibilities for removing nitrogen where it is
necessary.
MR. METZLER: May I inquire a little further
about the phosphorus, and then go on to nitrogen?
I hope the other conferees will forgive me, for
any time I get an opportunity to learn about these things,
I want to take that opportunity.
Do we know of any place except in that special
condition which we may have down in San Antonio, as far as
the quality of the municipal water supply is concerned,
where we have been able to modify the activated sludge
process so that we can, as a matter of fact, get reductions
in phosphorus?
MR. DeFALCO: Well, not on that basis. This is
the only work, as I pointed out, that has been done in this
area.
MR. METZLER: But there are other investigators
who have been working at this, and also trying to accomplish
these same goals, and there are still some doubts about
whether this will work any place other than San Antonio.
MR. DeFALCO: At the present moment this is
what is being pursued.
There is rather extensive work under way to

-------
82
Paul DeFalco
extend this to other areas of the country.
MR, STEIN: So that we keep this all in one
place, I think it would be fair to say that the information
from our investigators down in San Antonio — and I have
been keeping up with this too because we have this problem
in various places — is very encouraging, at least in their
view. They think it can be done in other places.
However, we do find that even in Chicago, or
Indiana, when you take two plants, we find that one plant
will be getting, oh, a 30 or 40 percent removal of phosphates,
and another will go up to 60.
What we are investigating is why these plants
are different, and if we can modify the process in various
parts of the country if they are different. Obviously, I
don't think we have come up with a procedure on modifying
the activated sludge operation that anyone can guarantee
will work in any part of the country.
However, we do know that phosphates can be
removed if you want to put a chemical precipitant in, and I
think that would work. We had to do that at Hanford, where
there were complaints about radioactive phosphorus. We did
put alum in and we got the phosphorus out.
Do you recall the cost on that, Paul?
MR. DeFALCO: No, I don't recall.

-------
Paul DeFalco
MR. STEIN: It wasn't really high, but It is
higher than we would like.
To summarize, I think the chemical precipitant
can safely be said to work if you want to get phosphorus
out most anywhere. The modification of the activated
sludge, I think, is still in the demonstration stage.
Let me tell you what happened in San Antonio,
though not in detail. They found one plant where the
phosphate removal was rather high, and the other plant where
it was not -- another plant in the same area, where it was
not high.
They examined the mode of operation and the flow
in both these plants, got the difference, modified the low
removal to coincide as closely as possible with the plant
with which was receiving high removal. Lo and behold, at
least in San Antonio or in the Arkansas-Texas plant, they
rather startlingly improved the removal of the phosphorus.
As Mr. Metzler points out, no one is sure at this
stage whether this is going to work anywhere else, but I
do think that if we put our minds to it, I am pretty sure
we can get a phosphate removal process that is going to
work in New York State and Long Island.
MR. METZLER: May I extend this question a bit
further?

-------
84
Paul DePalco
What did you have in mind as far as nitrate
removal is concerned, Paul?
MR. DeFALCO: Basically, carbon ad-sorption
techniques.
MR. METZLER: Well, I think you would have to
think about this in terms of the problem we have, and
certainly carbon absorption techniques would end up with
drinking water essentially. They are terribly expensive,
so much so that places with much more margin to operate
than I understand we have here — there may be other
methods —
MR. DePALCO: Right.
MR. METZLER: I didn't want to make a speech,
but I Just wanted to know what you had in mind.
MR. STEIN: On that last point again, I don't
want to spread the record beoause we have this worked out.
Would you say, Paul, that if we are going to get
at the nutrients, the most reasonable thing to do at the
present stage of the art might be to work on the phosphates?
MR. DePALCO: Right.
MR. STEIN: And wouldn't you say that the
removal of the nitrates, while we can do it in the
laboratory, in practice, under the present technique, if
we are talking about carbon adsorption, it might be so

-------
85
Paul DePalco
expensive that It would not really be feasible?
MR. DePALCO: Right.
Essentially, the phosphates are the primary
problem. We have to tackle these, of course.
MR. STEIN: Let me see if you can agree with
this: As I understand it, if we put in phosphates or
nitrates, this is like fertilizing your lawn. The difficulty
is in removing nitrates. Nitrogen and nitrates are rather
ubiquitous; they are found everywhere. We have tried to
keep them out, but we have not been very successful.
The scientific investigators have discovered that
If wc get one of the key elements, the phosphates, we can
control that. The likelihood is that if we can keep one of
the essential elerhents out, we are going to stop the algal
or weed growth.
We don't seem to have a likely breakthrough
economically to control nitrates, but at least the
investigators do feel they are on the verge.
I think Dwight has raised the question very
properly. I am not sure we have a foolproof system anywhere
throughout the country that is not going to be expensive,
but we are on the verge of being able to come up with a
system that can materially remove the phosphates, and we
should concentrate on phosphates.

-------
Paul DeFalco
Is that correct?
MR. DePALCO: Correct — absolutely correct.
MR. STEIN: All right. Thank you.
Do you have any more questions?
MR. METZLER: No. All I want to do Is Indicate
that this is a very constructive statement, and my
questions really were to the details of the statement, Paul.
MR. DePALCO: Right. I appreciate that.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Klashtnan?
MR. KLASHMAN: I have no further questions.
MR. STEIN: I just want to emphasize one more
point here, because I think while Mr. Metzler brought this
out, this is a key point in the economic damage.
When I hear these dockside prices of shellfish,
the going price when I have lunch — and I don't eat in one
place all the time in Washington — but at least in the
circuit of restaurants I go to in Washington it is $1.00
or $1.25 for a half a dozen clams on the half-shell. When
we are talking in terms of economic value, as I regard it,
we are not just talking about the dook price paid the shell-
fish farmer here, but we have to multiply that.
We will hear from the shellfish people later.
As you know, we were in the same agency for years, but now
we are split. They are still in the Public Health Service
and we are in the Department of the Interior, but we still

-------
Paul DePalco
work very closely together.
They have indicated on the basis of one study
— and again I don't want to extrapolate — in Plorida
there was a factor of 10 on the economy. I think they were
being conservative in the Plorida study, but if this is
so, if this price of two and a half million is correct, the
Impact on this area is in the magnitude of a loss of $25
r •
million a year. That is pretty big.
Are there any further questions or comments?
MR. KLASHMAN: No, I have none.
MR. STEIN: If not, before we hear the other
Federal representatives, we will recess for five minutes.
(Whereupon a recess was had.)
MR. STEIN: May we reconvene?
Ve would like to ask all those here who have
not registered, to register in the back when you have an
opportunity to do so.
During the recess, the'conferees have been to-
gether. Our agenda, as you know, is flexible, in order to
accommodate everyone whom we can.
Instead of the rest of the Federal people being
called next, we are going to cail on Mr. Metzler, the con-
feree for New York State, because he has a few people who
have to make a statement at this tine, as they have other

-------
88
Dr. Hbllia Ingraham
compelling commitments.
Mr. Metzler?
MR. METZLER: Thank you, Mr. Stein.
The Initial statement for the State of New York
will be made by Commissioner of Health, Dr. Hbllis Ingraham.
STATEMENT OP DR. HOLLIS S. INGRAHAM,
STATE HEALTH COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT
OP HEALTH, STATE OP NEW YORK
DR. INGRAHAM: Distinguished members of the
panel, ladles and gentlemen:
I am Hollis S. Ingraham, Commissioner of Health
of the State of New York. I am representing Governor Nelson
A. Rockefeller and bring you his assurance of his great
interest in the subject of this conference. As Commissioner
of Health, I am also a member of the New York State Water
Resources Commission. At this conference, I am also
representing the Commission.
In New York State, water resource policy is
formulated by the Water Resources Commission, while the
State Health Department is directly responsible for water
pollution control.
Today I will discuss with you the broad aspects

-------
89
Dr. Hbllis Ingraham
of the conditions of Moriches Bay and the eastern section
of Great South Bay and will describe the corrective actions
the State has taken to redeem theBe waters. Later in the
conference, staff members of the State Health Department
and of the State Conservation Department will discuss the
study area in much greater detail. These presentations
will be made by:
First, Mr. P. W. Montanari, Assistant Commis-
sioner, Water Resources Planning, Hew York State Conserva-
tion Department.
Mr. Robert D. Hennigan, Director, Bureau of
Water Resource Service, New York State Health Department.
Mr, David Wallace, Director, Bureau of Marine
Fisheries, New York State Conservation Department.
As you know, the bay waters under consideration
in this conference are about 17 miles long. They are
paralleled on the north by rural farm land, with the excep-
tion of several small villages and hamlets, and on the
south by a narrow strip of land commonly known as the
barrier beaches.
Although the study area is still primarily rural
and is geographically small, the volume of pollution issuing
from its shores is much greater than is normally expected
for a rural farm area of this size.

-------
90
Dr. Hollis Ingraham
While there are several sources of pollution
In the study area, the most significant source is that of
the duck farm industry.
More than 30 duck farms dump more than 30
million gallons of duck waste water into these waters each
day. They account for more than 40 times the total of
other waste water being discharged directly to the surface
waters in this study area. Many coves, inlets and small
streams are completely clogged with black, rotting duck
wastes. Over the years duck waste deposits in some of
these waters have reached depths of more than 10 feet.
Studies indicate that these wastes have severely
curtailed the production of shellfish in the bay waters.
The waste deposits, plus the rotting algae nurtured by the
wastes, helped to smother the oyster beds. This is a
classic example of conflict between two industries in their
need for water. The duck farm industry on Long Island
represents more than 60 percent of the production in the
nation, but both industries are vital to the State's
economy and we must insure that each is served fairly and
equitably. This may create some burden for the duck
industry, but they have a responsibility which they must
meet.
I must emphasize at this point that while duck

-------
Dr. Hoilis Ingraham
farm pollution is a large contributor to the decline of
the shellfish industry it is not the sole factor responsible
for the destruction of the oysters. Studies of the
hydrologic conditions of the bay waters Indicate that poor
circulation patterns also played a large part in the decline
of the oyster beds. If the shellfish industry is to be
revitalized, pollution control will not be the entire
answer. There is further need for channel and inlet
maintenance to insure adequate circulation of the bay waters.
Other sources of pollution reaching the bay
waters include human wastes being discharged to both the
surface and ground waters of the study area.
At present, the roost serious human waste dis-
charges are those dumping into the ground waters by way of
septic tank and cesspool systems. These wastes leach into
the ground waters and eventually find their way into the
bays.
A study of the entire Great South Bay, made by
the New York State Department of Health in the early sixties,
concluded that, and I quote:
"The waters of Great South Bay are abnormally
enriched by nutrients having their principal
origin in organic wastes produces by human
activities. These wastes come largely from

-------
92
Dr. Hollls Ingraham
"sewage effluents reaching the ground water which
is discharged to the bay."
The waters of these bays also serve as a play-
ground for the many thousands of people who enjoy boating
and sport fishing in Long Island's waters. But this is
also a source of pollution. The total waste load contributed
by this source is not known. However, the extent of the
problem can be appreciated since it is estimated that nore
than 100,000 water craft utilize Long Island waters, a
great percentage of which discharge raw human wastes
directly to the waters they are using.
It is evident that the pollution problem in the
conference study area is very large and very complex. In
this respect, it is not unlike the problems which face us
throughout the State, and for that matter, the problems
which face the people throughout the nation.
What are we in New York State doing about these
problems?
Obviously, the challenge is great. Meeting it
effectively has required years of planning and study that
have now culminated in Governor Rockefeller^ Pure Waters
Program, a water pollution control program which is second
to none in the nation.
With reference to Moriches Bay and the eastern

-------
93
Dr. Hollis Ingraham
section of Great South Bay, a sewage study of the five
western townships of Suffolk County has been completed, as
part of the Pure Waters Program, which recommends the
formation of a county sewer agency. State funds to the
extent of $661,000 have been contributed to the county.
Now being negotiated is a comprehensive sewage study of the
five eastern towns of Suffolk County. These studies will
provide the technical answers necessary for the elimination
of the municipal pollution in this part of Long Island.
In addition, a comprehensive water study is now
under way in Suffolk County. State funds to the extent of
$3^0,000 have been contributed for this purpose. The county
is guaranteed an expenditure of $450,000 to carry this study
even beyond the scope of the normal State-sponsored study.
The Pure Waters Act of 1965 provides for 30
percent State aid for construction of municipal sewage treat-
ment facilities, and, if necessary, a State advance of an
additional 30 percent to cover the Federal share. In New
York State, 60 percent aid is guaranteed to communities for
constructing sewage treatment facilities.
Another very important feature of the Pure Waters
Program haB been the streamlining of enforcement laws. In
the past, we have continually exercised the Department's
enforcement powers against pollution. But these powers

-------
94
Dr. Hoilis Ingraham
were severely limited by delaying devices in the law which
enabled the polluter to hold us off for years. These road-
blocks are a thing of the past. The pure Waters Program
brought with it effective legal powers by which we can
quickly take initial legal measures against known polluters.
We began scheduling hearings the day the new laws were put
on the books, a little over a year ago. Since that time,
we have held 180 hearings and have placed over 140 polluters
under orders to abate their pollution.
With specific reference to this conference, all
duck farms are under orders which require the duck farms
to abate their pollution by April 30, 1968. The orders
call for upgrading treatment to remove 85 percent of the bio-
chemical oxygen demand and 85 percent of suspended solids,
and for the substantial removal of phosphates from their
wastes.
This upgrading of treatment is the fourth and
final phase of a duck pollution abatement program Initiated
in the 1950's. Phase 1 called for removal of the ducks from
the open natural watercourses. Phase 2 for the construction
of settling facilities, and phase 3 for the disinfection of
wastes. Phases 1 and 2 have been met. Phase 3 is integrated
into Phase 4 under the above orders.
This year an act to amend the navigation law was

-------
95
Dr. Ho Hi s Ingraham
passed which will prohibit the discharge of inadequately
treated sewage from boats on the waters of the State.
Research is also vital to the Pure Waters Program.
Currently, some 15 projects are under way in the State.
This year alone, research contracts totaling over $300,000
were initiated. These projects include investigations of
better and more efficient methods of waste treatment, and
studies of algae to learn more about their behavior and how
they may be controlled. Worthy of special note is an
investigation of the reclamation and injection of sewage
into groundwaters to prevent Bait water intrusion, a study which
is very vital to Long Island since it is dependent solely upon
groundwater for its water supply.
Also, in the early 50'8 a State-financed duck waste
study was undertaken to learn more about the basic problems
of duck wastes and their treatment.
An additional study to find workable conditions
for treatment of the duck wastes was recently completed by
a consulting engineer. This study was financed jointly by
the Suffolk County Department of Health and the Long Island
Duck Farms Cooperative, Inc. I would like to take this
opportunity to thank both organizations for a fine job. The
duck farm industry must accept its responsibility and face
*
up to the water pollution problem, and this study is solid

-------
Dr. Ho His Ingraham
proof that they are willing to do so.
I believe this brief outline of our activities
shows that we are determined to meet our responsibilities
to stop pollution at its source. The tools given us by
Governor Rockefeller's Pure Waters Program have provided
swift and sure means by which we are assured of successfully
carrying out this task.
I must remind you, however, that once the pollu-
tion of Moriches Bay and Great South Bay has been stopped,
the battle will not have been completely won.
We must still remove the sludge deposits from
the bay waters. Unless removed, they will continue to
provide food for the algae. The algae will grow, die and
settle, in an unending cycle, unless these deposits are
eliminated.
We also must improve the hydrologic conditions
throughout the bay waters. If this is not done, the present
limited circulation will continue to affect the quality of
these waters.
What can be done? Cooperative Federal, State
and local action is obviously the answer. The State of New
York will see to it that the pollution is stopped. However,
we call for help from the Federal Government to maintain
the barrier beaches and channels in a manner that will

-------
97
Dr. Hollis Ingraham
provide the necessary hydrologic improvements, and we call
for local help to dredge or otherwise remove the sludge
deposits from the many coves, inlets and tributary streams
of the area.
In closing, may I say, for Governor Rockefeller,
that New York State welcomes today's conference as another
indication of the spirit of Federal, State and local
cooperation that is so necessary if these waters are to be
restored to their former condition.
Thank you, gentlemen.
MR. STEINj Thank you, Doctor.
Are there any comments or questions?
Mr. Metzler?
MR. METZLER: Did you want to comment, Dr.
Ingraham, on the conclusions that were reached as a result
of —
VOICES: Can't hear you.
MR. METZLER: I wondered if, in addition to the
prepared statement, Dr. Ingraham, you might want to comment
on the cooperation in connection with the pilot plant
project which is nearing completion, and will shortly be
placed in operation to study some aspects of treating of
the duck wastes?
DR. INGRAHAM: I think that you are getting a

-------
98
Dr. Mollis Ingraham
little beyond my technical capacities there, Mr. Metzler,
to comment very effectively on this pilot program. I would
much prefer to leave that to Mr. Hennigan when he takes the
stand.
MR. METZLER: All right.
MR. STEIN: Do you have any questions?
MR. KLASHMAN: No, I have no questions.
MR. STEIN: Doctor, I too would like to thank you
for the spirit of cooperation in this.
I do think we have substantial agreement, as far
as I can see, in the analysis of the problem both in your
statement and in the Federal statement.
The problem cannot be oversimplified. We do have
human wastes coming into the groundwater. We do have the
problem of duck wastes. We have a question here of sludge
deposits, and we have a question of keeping the circulation
pattern going in the bay.
Unless we attack all those problems, it seems
from the statements both of the State and Federal people,
that we are not going to achieve optimum results. It seems
to me even at this early stage that the attack on all
those problems is going to call for extensive cooperation
of Federal, State or local authorities.
Thank you very much, Doctor.

-------
99
Dr. HoIlls Ingraham
DR. INGRAHAM: Thank you.
MR. METZLER: Mr. Chairman, I thought that
Dr. Ingraham might want to comment on a matter that he
handled just yesterday In connection with an appeal we had
over the week-end really to participate more actively in
the pilot plant program here. We are providing a chemist
to do analytical work and determine the effectiveness of
the treatment processes during about a six-month period.
In addition, Dr. Ingraham personally led a search for some
money so that we might be able to participate further in
this and pay some of the operation and maintenance costs
during that period of time.
I thought he would like to announce this here.
Since he did not, if he doesn't mind, I will.
MR, STEIN: I also want to say we appreciate
New York's statement that their program was second to none.
We appreciate your delicacy, because at a recent conference,
one of the midwestern States said that not only was their
program second to none, but particularly it was better than
two of its neighboring States that it named.
While this has nothing to do with the conference,
we can hardly get down to business after that announcement.
Thank you.
MR. METZLER: As you know, we are concerned

-------
100
H. Lee Dennison
about cleaning up pollution in New York State, and we don't
propose to be making many comments -about our neighbors
until we are in better shape than we are in now.
I appreciate the opportunity to present the
County Executive from our host county here, Suffolk County,
Mr. Dennison, who has shown a deep awareness of the water
problems and the importance of water to Suffolk County, and
has led the county in its cooperative work leading to the
sewerage study.
He has asked to be put on now because of the
other commitments he has today.
Mr. Dennison, it is a pleasure to welcome you
here this morning.
STATEMENT OP H. LEE DENNISON, COUNTY
EXECUTIVE, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK
MR. DENNISON: Members of the panel, Dr.
Ingraham, friends — at least, temporary friends of the
gathering:
You know, it is quite a pleasure for me to be
legal for a change in bringing up what has been for seven
years my favorite after-lunch subject of the need for public
sewers.

-------
H. Lee Dennison	iUi
I welcome this group here, but I must say at the
same time it is to me a sad commentary on something or
another that the Federal and the State people have to come
into this county to undertake to meet problems that I
believe should have been undertaken years ago by our own
local agencies of government.
There has been a failure — no question about it
— through these past years, in our much-wanted local home
rule. There can be no excuse, because the tremendous growth
we have had in this county for the last fifteen years has
been going on for that long. During all of these years the
conditions of pollution considered here today, have existed.
The purpose of the meeting is, as it is spelled
out, to have the Federal, State and local governments
try to work together to abate pollution.
The County of Suffolk has not been exactly idle
these past years. The area in question has been under many
diverse jurisdictions. There have been the local failures,
of course, and failures, as I call it, in, shall we say,
political intent and purpose and action. There has been
failure in coordination among the diverse agencies, and, as a
result, there has been little or no accomplishment in the
abatement of pollution.
These failures naturally have been very costly.

-------
H. Lee Dennison
We have not been able to reach all of our people in timeli-
ness about this cost,
I will give great credit here where credit is
due to the many agencies or civic organizations and con-
servationist groups and the League of Women Voters, who have
been trying all these years to get constructive action.
One of the catalysts for action out of which
stemmed this meeting I think probably has been the creation
of the Fire Island National Seashore, which borders on the
area in question. For this I am very thankful.
Let me say that Suffolk all these past years —
at least, there has been a seven-year campaign by diverse
groups and the executive office concerning the need for
public sewage disposal, particularly in the western half of
the county, in which the population is now approaching some-
thing like 900,000 people. There is now, as explained by
Dr. Ingraham, a public sewage disposal program in process,
and here again, thanks to the contributions — a gift by the
State of New York — in the amount of $660,000 to get this
program under way.
As explained also by Dr. Ingraham, I am empowered
to say that in our recent undertaking of surveys of our
fresh water resources, the State will contribute 300-some-
thousand dollars, but the county too will contribute much

-------
103
H» Lee Dennison
more than this to carry this study beyond the State program.
The sewage disposal program itself has been so
long delayed, and recently delayed these past years by
diverse reasons, that I can report, I think, that District
No. 1 will be up for public referendum probably by January
or February. This is the westernmost district of the program.
Actually, construction on District No. 1 can't possibly begin
before two and a half years from now. District No. 2, next
to It coming eastward, can't possibly begin before three
years from now. District No. 3, still coming eastward and
approaching the area under consideration here today, will not
be under construction for probably something like four years.
These three or four districts on the south shore of the
county will take something like twenty years to complete,
so that you see the problem we are trying to meet here has
to be long-range, sinoe human sewage is contributory in great
part to the problem.
A great deal has been said about pollution of
these areas by the duck farms. Here again, it has been a
running battle for the last seven years by different groups
of people and the executive office -- a battle that began
actually in the early 1950's, when the State passed the first
law trying to abate pollution by the duoka.
I Must take issue with the State during these

-------
104
H. Lee Dennison
years, not only with the way the original law was written,
but in the carrying out or implementation of this law.
For example, our local Department of Health,
charged with the responsibility for inspection of the duck
farms and that sort of thing through all these past ten years,
has repeatedly, time after time, reported violations to the
State Attorney General's Office. However, I have to report
today that pollution today is as it was in the early 1950's.
The law itself carried a safety clause for the
industry, whereby any duck farmer could plead poverty. This
again was contributory to little or nothing ever being
accomplished against the pollution by the duck farms.
Recently a new program has been undertaken, a
joint venture by the industry, county, Department of Health,
and the County of Suffolk, with cooperative help this time
from the local agency of government, trying to get up some
kind of program of sewage disposal facilities for ducks
similar to humans.
Now, I have been so upset is hardly the word, but
in the struggle against this pollution over these past
years, I finally, not too long ago, reached one simple con-
clusion, a conclusion that in spite of our recent new
efforts for the construction of disposal plants for ducks —
in spite of these efforts, I still must repeat my conclusion

-------
105
H. Lee Dennison
that there is only one answer to pollution by the duck
farms. That is, to have no ducks.
At this point, the communities, the towns and
the county have to balance what is a tremendously important
and big industry of this county, employing certain numbers
°f people, against the adverse effects of the industry and
the value of lands, recreation, the boating industry,
shellfish and the fisheries — everything that is adversely
affected by the duck industry as such.
The actual answer to this will have to come out of
our recent meetings with the State. We were all in Albany
together last Friday. I say here again publicly that while
possibly this new effort, this new splurge of effort on the
part of everyone concerned, including the industry, may
eventually be the answer. We can't wait for the answer any
longer, we can't, for one simple reasons As everybody
knows, we are the fastest growing area in this country. We
now have a million people. At the present rate of growth,
we win have two million people by 1982. We simply can't
wait for anybody or anything to meet the problems of sudden,
Instant growth.
There are many things that could, I hope, come
out of this meeting, and I am talking here about additional
Federal and State cooperation, which is why we are here.

-------
106
H. Lee Dennlson
For example, one of the contributory factors,
I believe, as a professional engineer, has been concerned
with Shinnecock and the Moriches inlets, the inlets that
were created, one in 193^ and one in 1938 by hurricane
action. These inlets contribute a great deal toward the
fresh water and salinity part of the Great South Bay, both
Shinnecock, Moriches and Great South Bay itself.
However, we have had requests in Washington for
the improvement and the rebuilding of Shinnecock and
Moriches inlets since i960. The plans are all ready. The
Federal Corps of Engineers is ready. The County of Suffolk
has indicated its desire for these projects, its willingness
to contribute its share; but, for some reason or another,
in these past half a dozen years, we have not been able to
get these two particularly badly needed projects into, shall
we say, the Federal pork barrel in Washington.
These we need badly. Possibly the strength of
the Department of the Interior can help us to get these
projects under way.
Again, as a part of these particular inlets, we
are in the process with the Federal Government and the
State of New York of a beach erosion prevention control
program. It is under way successfully with the new pilot
projects, but we need this project extended just as fast as

-------
107
H. Lee Dennison
we can get It extended, not only to protect against erosion,
but for another very important reason, that part of this
program would mean the building of dunes In back of groin
construction out in the ocean.
Well, coming through these two inlets, Shinnecock
and Moriches Inlet, since they were created, has been sand
from the westward movement of the ocean. There are now
deposited in the inner bays not less than 50 million tons
of sand adjacent to these Inlets that has got to be cleaned
out.
So that I am asking here of the Department of the
Interior to help us in Washington to get a little expeditious
program going on in this beach erosion program, so that we
can get at the removal of these 50 million tons of Interior
sand.
There is, after creating the National Seashore,
provision possibly for a new inlet, and I would ask that
this be studied and hopefully expedited, all pointed toward
the one direction, that of the solution of the pollution
and stagnation in areas of the whole Great South Bay area.
Of course, we also need greatly expanded channel
dredging programs on the part of the Federal and State
governments. We are undertaking, at our own local level,
tremendous programs of channel dredging.

-------
108
H. Lee Dennison
We have one of the biggest industries in the
State in pleasure boating in this area. We need new programs,
possibly with the State and with the Federal Government, for
the control of and the elimination of stagnant areas, and we
have these along the shorelines.
We certainly need some studies and programs for
better control of insecticides, D.D.T., and that sort of
thing.
If we are going to have the duck industry, cer-
tainly we need shore legislation, shore enforcement, and
shore programs for real action.
There must be, because of the diverse countless
agencies of local government, where there has been, in the
past, a lack of coordination, a lack of working together --
there must be, I am of the firm opinion now, some kind of
central, overall administration for planning and coordina-
tion and administration of all of our bay waters, all of our
boating areas, and channels, and marinas, and fisheries, as
far as the pollution is concerned.
There was created in the executive office some
time ago a citizens' task force -- we call it our Citizens'
Conservation Commission — and we had in mind at this time
that this could eventually become the official coordinating
agency for conservation for all of our resources, not

-------
H. Lee Dennison	y
particularly Great South Bay, but for all of the waters of
the county and all of our matters of conservation. There
has been no action on this program yet. We have, as I say,
only hopes for that this possibly could be the coordinating
agency.
Here again, if we run into problems with local
home rule and local independencies, possibly the State and
the Federal Governments will have to come in to help us
create some kind of central overall administration for all
of these purposes.
I would like to say here, on behalf of the County
of Suffolk, that, as I have tried to say, we have not been
exactly idle. One of our best programs, these past half
dozen years, has been the acquisition of public lands, a
great part of which have been wet lands. Most important,
more than half of them have been comprised of the fresh
water river drainage areas of the county. We now have all
of these generally in public hands at the county level.
This to me has been the best step toward what this meeting
has been called for of any the county has yet undertaken.
I must take some issue with Dr. Ingraham about
his State's new billion dollar clean waters program, because
again, as an engineer, I don't think it is nearly enough.
To me it is about like a penny on a meat block when you

-------
110
H. Lee Dennison
want to buy a pound of meat. A billion dollars is to me
only a start of what will have to be eventually spent really
to meet the problem. I say that particularly because we are
going to need almost that whole billion dollars right here
in Suffolk County before we really meet the problems for
which we are here gathered.
There isn't any question about it. Figure it up.
Figure up the cost of your sewage disposal plant, Just to
begin with, Just in the western half of this county.
Then there is the little matter of a six-year
program to have fresh waters throughout the State. By that,
I assume you can take a teacup in the middle of the Hudson
River and drink it.
Well, six years from now, I don't think I want
to, because, in the first place, the program has to do only
or generally, mainly, with disposal of human sewage through
local agencies of Kovernment. and there isn't anything in
there for industry, which to me also constitutes about half
the pollution problem.
I say this here today because we ran into this
problem in Albany last Friday, whereby we were trying to get
some help for the duck industry from the State, for their
pilot plant, and so far I don't believe we are going to have
any answers that the State is going to give us any aid for

-------
Ill
H. Lee Dennison
the industry. If this is true, then it is true State-
wide, and the industries up and down the rivers of this
State, the Hudson, for example — the pollution is going to
exist for some time yet, particularly if it is left entirely
to industry without help.
I must say here that I am thankful for this
meeting, if only as a catalyst, hopefully, for action. The
problem is the most serious we face in this county in the
face of this tremendous growth, and it is most serious
because it affects any way you can think of it, the most
priceless asset we have in this county, which is waterfront
and the adjacent waters surrounding the County of Suffolk.
I must say one other thing, as far as the county
is concerned. We are trying, hopefully again, to work on a
regional basis in these problems. There has been recently
created, as the panel may know, a bi-county planning agency,
which will undertake the study of the resources of Nassau,
•our tiny little neighbor to the west, and Suffolk, together
as a region. This will include, of course, all of the water
resources in Great South Bay. We are moving along these
lines regionally. We have been accomplishing, at least,
partial things in these past years.
I want to thank this group for being here today.
I want to say one other thing, that the office
of the County Executive is open any time, any way, in which

-------
112
H. Lee Dennison
we can be of help to expedite, to bring information to or
action to this group, hopefully, for accomplishment.
Thank you.
MR, STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Dennison, for a very
thorough and provocative statement.
There may be some comments or questions, if you
want to stay.
Mr, Metzler?
MR. DENNISON: I can't usually get out without a
fight.
(Laughter.)
MR. METZLER: Well, I have learned that when you
are a newcomer to an area, you don't take on someone who has
established the kind of leadership you have exerted here, so
I have no intention of fighting with you today, sir.
I wanted to say specifically on your point of
your being in Albany Friday, that I am sorry I could not be
there and did not know that you were there, and so had no
opportunity to be there; but that Dr. Ingraham did find
some money to pay the maintenance and operation costs of
your pilot project, in addition to the chemist who will be
assigned to this. So we will be cooperative with you. I
hope we are a full partner in this, looking for a solution.
I know it must be a terrible surprise to citizens to come to

-------
113
H. Lee Dennison
Mbany and find out that all of that billion dollars isn't
there in a desk drawer, and we can use it.
MR. DENNISON: We are doing all right. We got
$660,000 already for sewage.
MR. STEIN: You know, I rarely get out without a
fight either, but I think we have several points.
The Corps of Engineers representatives are here.
Of course, I spent most of my professional life in this
business going before the Public Works Committees.
I would like to say that we and the Corps have
been working together for years. We will continue to work
together, but I do think -- and here is the point I want to
make, which I think is very important -- if we are going
to support any stabilization or dredging process, we can't
do that just from our point of view or the Interior point
of view as just a dredging and stabilization process. We
have to do this as part of a total picture.
If we can develop a program that will clean up
domestic pollution from your septic tanks and your seepage
from the duck farms, and we can work on the sludge deposits,
you can be assured that if, to improve the circulation, you
need stabilization of these outlets, the Department of

-------
114
H. Lee Dennison
the Interior will do everything it can, and will work very
closely with the Corps to see that those projects are done.
I may say also that we go before these committees
and the committees know us very well and listen to us; but
we must go there as part of a total picture.
I just want to say one more thing for your county,
because I have been involved in this too. In 1957, Mr.
Klashman, who was then in New York — he has since been to
Denver and back and we are still faced with the same problem
— requested a grant for the duck farm wastes in the area.
At that time I was involved in this, because I made or at
least gave the opinion that under the Federal law we could
give you the money.
It is now 1966. You haven't had your final
payment on the plant. The plant is not working.
It is true this was primary treatment at that
time, and the sights were higher. I would hope if you work
with the State people in the demonstration project, and
with the Federal people, because we are prepared to work
with you, in the last analysis, in order for any of these
things to work out, the county must do it. It is the day-
to-day operation of your local people. It is no use if we
give you money for a demonstration plant and you won't
run it.

-------
115
W. L. Burns
All right. Thank you.
Mr. Mefczler?
MR. METZLER: Mr. Chairman, I would like to
present the Honorable William L. Burns for a brief statement
here. He has a commitment to sell a parcel of land* and I
wouldn't want to interfere with any business transactions
this afternoon. He has asked if he could be heard for a
brief statement.
He is a member of the Assembly, and a very
interested member of the Legislature in water resources.
STATEMENT OP ASSEMBLYMAN WILLIAM L. BURNS,
SEVENTH ASSEMBLY DISTRICT, STATE OP NEW YORK
MR. BURNSj Thank you, sir.
As Mr. Metzler said, I am Assemblyman William
L. Burns from the Seventh Assembly District in the western
part of Suffolk County.
I am here today more as an observer than as a
participant in this hearing. Unfortunately, my letter of
invitation, under date of September 13* did not arrive
until only yesterday, leaving me with very little time to
prepare.
X have lived all my life on the west end of

-------
116
W. L, Burns
Qreat South Bay. We have had problems of pollution, and
with the expanded population our problems are growing. All
of us in western Suffolk County are aware that we must be
militant in battling against the threat of water pollution.
Just recently, I was appointed a member of the
New York State Temporary Commission on Water Resources
Planning. This position brings me even closer to the problem
of water pollution.
I would like to listen to some of the testimony
and to learn. I would also like to receive a copy of the
complete transcript of these hearings, so that I may report
back to the Water Resources Planning Commission. While
the Commission's chief objective is to maintain our pure
fresh waters, I think this objective is related because
certainly if our salt water estuaries are allowed to become
polluted it would follow, especially here in eastern Suffolk
County, that our fresh warter supply would be harmed.
Thank you very much.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
Are there any comments or questions?
(No response.)
MR. STEIN: If not, we will have one more
participant before we recess for lunch.
Mr. Klashman, would you want to introduce him?

-------
M. Abelson
117
MR. KLASHMAN: Yes. Mr. Mark Abelson, who is
the Regional Coordinator for the Northeast Region of the
Department of the Interior.
Mr. Abelson.
STATEMENT OP MARK ABELSON, REGIONAL
COORDINATOR, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OP THE INTERIOR
MR. ABELSON: Mr. Chairman, conferees, ladies and
gentlemen:
Before I give my statement, I would like to add
something to the remarks of Mr. Dennlson concerning the
deposits of sand in the inlets.
We are working closely, of course, with the Corps
of Engineers on all their projects, as far as Fire Island
is concerned. Also, you may be interested in the Act
setting up the Fire Island National Seashore, where Section
8(b) states that:
"The Secretary may also contribute the
necessary land which may be required at any
future date for the construction of one new
inlet across Fire Island in such location as may
be feasible, in accordance with plans for such

-------
118
M. Abelaon
"an Inlet which are mutually acceptable to the
Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of
the Army, and that it is consistent with the
purposes of this Act."
I am Mark Abelson, Regional Coordinator for the
Northeast Region, United States Department of the Interior.
The Department of the Interior Is the nation's
primary agency charged with responsibility for a wide
variety of programs for the management, conservation and
development cf the natural resources which benefit every
section of the nation. For this reason it can best be
described as a "Department of Natural Resources."
The Department is made up of some three dozen
bureaus and offices whose functions and responsibilities
cover the entire range of natural and human resources. In
the Northeast, coordination of these functions and responsi-
bilities is accomplished through ray office in Boston.
The broad scope of the Department's functions is
indicated by the following brief listing of its principal
activities: The Department has direct responsibility for
some 550 million acres of Federally owned lands and
administers the mining and mineral leasing laws on other
lands; it irrigates more than 8 million acres of reclaimed
lands in the West; manages hydroelectric power systems with

-------
119
M. Abelson
a capacity of approximately 13 million kilowatts; protects
fish and wildlife resources; conserves hundreds of vital
scenic, historic, and park areas; coordinates and advances
outdoor recreation programs; conducts geologic research,
hydrologic investigations, and topographic surveys; promotes
more efficient mining and processing methods and mine
safety; encourages mineral exploration and conducts mineral,
fuel and saline water research; provides grants for water
resources research; administers oil import programs;
operates helium plants and the Alaska Railroad; works for
the welfare of about 180,000 people in areas administered
by the United States; exercises trusteeship for the well-
being of about 380,000 Indians, Aleuts and Eskimos along
with resource management on about 50 million acres of Indian
owned lands; and since May 10th of this year, administers
grants, conducts research, and administers enforcement pro-
visions for water pollution control.
In carrying out these vital responsibilities
for sound management of natural resources, the Department
encourages efficient resource use; works to assure that a
sound resource base is provided to meet the needs of our
expanding economy, our national security, and our future
generations; promotes an equitable distribution of benefits
from nationally-owned resources; and seeks to prevent

-------
120
M. Abelson
wasteful exploitation of resources.
The Department has a definite interest in all
waters of the country and in the entire pollution problem.
Water, and its associated opportunities and
problems, ignore State, regional and international boundaries.
It is important that the interrelationships of water be
so recognized and that the efforts of all concerned be aimed
at harmonious, comprehensive, and coordinated plans for
the best use of this valuable resource.
The focus of the efforts of the Department of the
Interior is directed to the maintenance of adequate national
water supplies and adequate water quality for whatever uses
man may wish to make of this resource. The Interior
approach emphasizes the coordination and interrelation
between uses and the effect of these uses on management and
quality of the total water supply system. We hope we can
make it possible for the country to remain as an affluent,
not the effluent society.
Maintenance of water quality involves not only
the quality levels of human consumption, but also quality
levels for consumption by other animal and plant life, for
development of other natural resources, and for industrial
processes. These quality considerations are interrelated.
They can be understood and controlled best from the point

-------
121
M. Abelson
of view of water as a resource, rather than from the point
of view of a particular quality need.
All waters in rivers, lakes, bays and estuaries
should be as clean as possible, not as unclean as admis-
sible. In handling water problems over a period of years,
the Department has accumulated a great deal of experience.
It has the facilities and the qualified manpower to deal
with a wide variety of water problems. The broad interests
of the Department in water quality and related problems in
the Moriches Bay and Great South Bay are reflected in the
Department's agencies, including the tfater Pollution Control
Administration, represented at this conference. While each
of these agencies has its own program, the Department exer-
cises the administration necessary to assure that all
programs are coordinated to achieve the best overall results.
Interior bureaus, in addition to the Water
Pollution Control Administration, carry on water quality
studies related to the physical, chemical and biological
adequacy of our water resources. These studies and the
associated research are chiefly those in which the skills
and required knowledge are based on geology, chemistry,
hydrology, engineering, and other physical science aspects
of water management. Interior's water quality research
extends beyond water supply to the study of environments

-------
122
M. Abelson
adequate for the propagation, production and control of
both fish and wildlife resources, and for water-based
recreation.
In common with many others, the Department of the
Interior has interests and responsibilities in the economic
and social aspects of water quality management. We recog-
nize that such factors as quantitative requirements, com-
petitive uses, and marketability of water and associated
products must be given consideration in all plans. Interior
takes account of the economic impact and other values that
protection of water quality will have on the communities,
the basin, the State and the Nation.
The Department is concerned with the conservation
and development of commercial fishery resources in this
area. Of major interest is the maintenance of commercial
shellfishery resources as related to the natural hard clam
fishery of the area, and the development of artificial
propagation techniques and facilities for hard clam and
oyster resources. All activity in this area is coordinated
closely with the shellfish industry and the State of New
York Conservation Department. Any pollutant which impairs
or downgrades the water quality of the area will have
adverse effects on these activities, and will be detrimental
to the commercial fishery resources.

-------
1 o
M. Abelson
Under authority of the Fish and Wildlife Coordina-
tion Act, the Department reports on Federally constructed
projects, or projects that are constructed under Federal
permit. Reports Include those concerned with navigation,
beach erosion control, and hurricane protection. In
cooperation with the New York State Conservation Department,
Interior's objective is the conservation and development of
commercial fishery resources. Any pollution abatement
which might take place in the area would enhance habitat
conditions for these resources.
We note that shellfish has a recreational aspect
as well as a commercial one. The closure of practically
the entire northern shoreline of Great South Bay and
Moriches Bay because of polluted conditions prevents
residents and vacationers from utilizing this resource by
digging a mess of clams. One of the Joys of visiting the
shore has been eliminated.
While the major sport fishing occurs in and along
channels in the relatively unpolluted parts of the bays,
people are reluctant, from esthetic and health viewpoints,
to fish those closed segments of the rivers and inshore
areas whi«h could furnish local shore fishing and boat
fishing opportunity.
Pollution acts as a fertilizing element in these

-------
M. Abelaon
bays and the basic productivity is very high. It is a
productivity, however, that cannot be fully utilized
because the seafood produced has not only incorporated
the nutrient part of the pollutants, but very often their
bacterial load. If these health hazards can be eliminated,
then sportsmen can make full use of the bountiful produc-
tion of shellfish and finfish in these bays.
Much of the bay lies outside the area authorized
for Fire Island National Seashore, but for 3^ miles along
the seashore's northern boundary, the bay's influence is
so much a part of the seashore's environment as to make
them inseparable.
The quality of the natural environment of the
island and its surroundings will be the final measure of
enjoyment to the visitor, as well as the value it can render
to scientist and scholar. The preservation and protection
of the natural biologic communities, both land and marine,
associated with the seashore, depends, to a large degree,
on the maintenance of pollution-free waters in Great South
Bay.
In conclusion, I would like to say that we urge
that steps will be taken to eliminate from Moriches and
Great South Bay those domestic, agricultural and industrial
pollutants which detract from the full public enjoyment of

-------
125
M. Abelson
the aquatic resources of these areas.
Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
Are there any comments or questions on Mr.
Abelson's statement?
(No response.)
MR, STEIN: Thank you very much.
You know* maybe I should make one last comment
before we go,
Mr. Dennison has left, but it seems to me that
I am not persuaded yet that the way to handle this is to get
rid of an industry. Anyone can clean up pollution by
shutting down an Industry or padlocking city hall.
It seems to me the challenge we face in modern
times in pollution control is maintaining the industry if
we can, with also the opportunity for population growth.
In my opinion, we can have both industry and population
growth and clean waters, if we put our minds to it.
Now, maybe we are wrong here, but I think this
is one of the issues that, as we develop this conference,
we should keep our eye on.
Mr. Metzler, do you have a further continent':
MR. METZLER: I would like to acknowledge that
Assemblyman Peter J. Costigan is here, and that he is very

-------
126
much interested in the matter that is under discussion
today.
He did not receive his announcement in time
to permit him to prepare a statement in advance, and I
would like to say to you, sir, that the record will stay
open for ten days or so. In the event you would like to
submit a statement, it not only will be received, but it
will be carefully considered.
I am sorry that your announcement did not reach
you in time to permit you to make the statement that you
wanted to.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
We will stand recessed until half past one.
(Whereupon, at 12:15 P.m., a luncheon recess
was taken.)

-------
127
AFTERNOON SESSION
(1:55 P.m.)
MR. STEIN: May we reconvene?
I would like to read a telegram first. It says:
"Only pressures of my chairmanship of
Tactical Aircraft Subcommittee now in executive
session keep me from joining you at opening today
of joint Federal-State effort arrive at solutions
for desperately polluted waters of Great South
Bay, Moriches and Shinnecock Bays, called by
Secretary of the Interior Stewart Udall at the
request of Senator Kennedy and this Congressman.
The reports that will be presented over the next
three days by shellfishermen, conservationists,
government officials, will, I am sure, point up
urgent necessity of enforcing some, of the existing
laws a little more enthusiastically. I am glad to
report we were able to persuade the House Appro-
priations Committee to include $100,000 toward
the stabilization of Moriches Inlet, which I feel
will play an important role in easing the pollution
problem. I also hope for a new inlet across Fire
Island for the same purpose, and pledge continued
effort to bring this about, should your

-------
128
"deliberations indicate its desirability.
Your cooperative activity has my blessing
and my promise of every effort within my
power to advance its findings.
Otis 0. Pike
Member of Congress
First District State of New York."
We also have an announcement that I am going to
repeat later, as more people might come in.
The information I have now is that Senator
Robert Kennedy will be here tomorrow to make a statement.
Tentatively, we expect him at about 10:30 in the morning,
although we have to check with his office this evening to
confirm that, to be certain.
We will now continue with the rest of the
Federal presentation.
Mr. Klashman?
MR. KLASHMAN; I should now like to call on Mr.
Frank L. Panuzio, Chief of the Engineering Division, New
York District, Corps of Engineers.
Mr. Panuzio.
STATEMENT OF FRANK L. PANUZIO, CHIEF OF
ENGINEERING* DIVISION OF NEW YORK DISTRICT,
CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-------
129
P. L. Panuzio
MR. PANUZIO: I am Prank L. Panuzio, Chief of
Engineering Division, New York District, Corps of Engineers.
I am making this statement on behalf of Colonel R. T.
Batson, the District Engineer, who regretfully found that
he could not be present today due to prior commitments on
other urgent matters requiring his personal attention.
The New York District includes for civil works the
watersheds of Hudson River and Lake Champiain, and the many
waterways draining into New York Ifarbor and Atlantic Ocean
as far south as Manasquan Inlet, New Jerse^, and as far
east as Montauk Point, Long Island, New York. Not the least
of these tributary waters under our jurisdiction are
Moriches Bay and Great South Bay, extending for 33 miles
along the south shore of Long Island, of which 17 miles are
included in the area under consideration in this conference.
The civil functions of the Corps of Engineers
along the coastal areas include the improvement of channels,
anchorage areas and protective works such as breakwaters
and jetties to preserve the entrances to the inner water-
ways from the open waters. The construction of jetties
and groins to diminish the force of the seas breaking against
the shores and the construction of sand dunes, and beach
fill to halt the flooding caused by hurricanes and other
extreme storms, are also a part of our civil works program.

-------
130
P. L. Panuzio
Inland, the Corps of Engineers also constructs dams,
reservoirs, floodwalls and other protective works to prevent
the extensive damages from floods and develop allied
natural resources uses. On the other hand, the Corps of
Engineers also considers and approves, when appropriate,
the plans of State and local governments, industry and indi-
viduals for construction and dredging in navigable waters.
While our primary specific consideration must continue to
be the benefit or effects of the work for navigation, flood
control, beach erosion, and hurricane protection, the
conservation and improvement of our natural resources, in-
cluding the abatement of pollution, plays an important part
in our considerations of the many civil works endeavors in
which we take part.
The basic interest of the Corps of Engineers
in pollution of navigable waters stems from its responsi-
bility in the development of water resources of all rivers,
bays and harbors within its boundaries. The most general
law with respect to pollution, enforced by the Corps of
Engineers, is Section 13 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
3 March 1899. This law in essence states that it is unlaw-
ful to throw, discharge or deposit any refuse matter of any
kind or description whatsoever other than that flowing from
streets and sewers and passing therefrom in a liquid state,

-------
131
F. L. Panuzio
whereby navigation shall or may be impeded. You will note
from the last phrase, that pollution in its broadest inter-
pretation is not unlawful under the statute, but only the
deposit of refuse material which is injurious to navigation.
Under this statute, this distinction limitB the role of the
Corps of Engineers in the prevention of pollution,
However, the Corps of Engineers plays a significant
part in pollution abatement in comprehensive natural resource
studies that involve navigation, flood control, beach
erosion, and hurricane protection. In this light it is
effected through close coordination and participation of
local, State and Federal agencies in these studies.
Current projects pertinent to this conference
are; The Moriches Inlet Project, which provides for exten-
sion of jetties and a channel 200 feet wide and 10 feet
*
deep at mean low water with sand bypassing facilities; the
Fire Island Inlet to Jones Inlet Beach Erosion Project,
which provides for the stabilization of the inlet and sand
bypassing facilities; a model study is presently under way
at Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss,; the Fire
Island to Montauk Point Beach Erosion and Hurricane Project,
which would require borrow of sand from inlets and inner
bays that could have an effect on pollution.

-------
132
P. L, Panuzio
Current pertinent legislation with respect to
seaweed problems was enacted by Section 302 of the Rivers
and Harbors Act of 1965* which authorizes the Corps of
Engineers to undertake a continuing program of aquatic plant
control, including research for development of effective
and economic control measures. The study of the seaweed
problem in Great South Bay and Moriches would have to be
programmed for appropriations.
Other pertinent pending legislation, introduced
by Congressman Grover, is a bill, H. R. 10803, 89th
Congress, 1st Session, which proposes that the Secretary
of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers, conduct
a complete investigation and study of water utilization and
control of Great South Bay, including the waters of adjoining
lesser bays and inlets. This investigation, if approved,
would involve study of navigation, fisheries, flood control,
control of noxious weeds, water pollution, water quality
control, beach erosion and recreation. It would also
authorize the construction, operation and maintenance of a
hydraulic model on Long Island and an associated technical
center. Such facilities would aid in the understanding of
the factors contributing to the present problems in the
area and in developing remedial measures.
The Corps of Engineers will continue to cooperate

-------
P. L. Panuzio	~-J-
with all localj State and Federal agencies to control
pollution in streams to the extent of its authority and
to ask for their cooperation on stream pollution matters
in basin-wide studies for the conservation and development
of water resources.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
Are there any comments or questions?
Mr. Klashman?
MR. KLASHMAN: Mr. Panuzio, I would like to ask
you a question, if I may.
Mr. Dennison, when he spoke before lunch, dis-
cussed the Moriches Inlet and what was being done about it,
and he seemed to feel that the Federal Government had not
been doing its part, as I understood him.
I wonder if you could expand on this and explain
what the background on this is, and what the Corps of
Engineers is doing and plans to do?
MR. PANUZIO: Well, first of all, probably to
understand what happens and what the Federal Government's
role is, you should understand the procedure by which
»
Federal works are actually authorized.
When people want something they go to their
Congressman, and in this particular instance, they went to
two of their Congressmen and they indicated that Moriches

-------
13^
P. L. Panuzio
was a problem. It was a problem from the viewpoint of
navigation, a problem from the viewpoint of recreation, and
a problem from pollution.
Based on that, the Congressmen then actually,
since there was an existing project, merely asked for a
resolution. A resolution was given to the Committee on
Public Works, The Committee on Public Works, in accordance
with its desire, actually approved the resolution, and it
became a matter of study.
The study then was handed to the Corps of
Engineers, and since the Corps of Engineers is developed in
divisions and districts, it finally got down to the pertinent
district, which was the New York District.
A study was made, and it was found that Moriches
Inlet required Improvement from recreation, from navigation
and from pollution considerations. A report was completed,
and it was presented to Congress with recommendations of
the Corps of Engineers that an improvement be made in
Moriches Inlet, That project was approved by Congress. It
becomes a project which can be considered for appropriations.
Now, the approval of the project does not auto-
matically give it money. It merely makes it eligible for
receipt of construction money.
Now, how do you get the construction money? The

-------
135
F. L. panuzio
Congress of the United states is made up of representatives
of the people. If the people want a project badly enough,
again they get their Congressmen to see to it that moneys
are appropriated for the project. Then, after the moneys
are appropriated for the project, again it follows the
same procedure.
The money is appropriated by Congress, it is
given to the Corps of Engineers, and it gets down to the
action district.
In addition to that, it must be remembered that
all projects are cooperative projects. This project
requires elements of local cooperation. The local people
must want the project, and must be willing to participate,
and by "participation" in this particular case, it requires
that the local people hold the Government free of damages
because of the worksj that the local people actually furnish
such land easements and rights-of-way which might be required;
that the local people pass certain ordinances which are
required to insure that the workers are oroperly used; and
that local people are also willing to make such cash contri-
butions as may be required.
So, you see, It is not only the Federal Government
which is necessary for a project to proceed, but it la alBo
the willingness and the desire of the people themselves, the

-------
136
P. L. Panuzio
local people, so It Is not appropriate to say that the
Federal Government was remiss in not getting this started,
because you remember all of the necessary tools for getting
it started do lie right with the people themselves.
MR. KLASHMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. panuzio.
MR. STEIN: Do you have any further questions,
Mr. Klashman?
MR. KLASHMAN: No.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Metzler?
MR. METZLER: No.
MR. STEIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Panuzio.
Mr. Klashman?
MR. KLASHMAN: I should like to call on my old
colleague, Mr. Ralph VanDerwerker, who is Program Director,
Environmental Engineering and Pood Protection, United
States public Health Service, Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare, New York.
Mr. VanDerwerker.
STATEMENT OP RALPH J. VanDERWERKER, PROGRAM
DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING AND
POOD PROTECTION, UNITED STATES PUBLIC HEALTH
SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OP HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND
WELFARE, NEW YORK

-------
137
R. J. VanDerwerker
MR. VanDERWERKERj Mr. Klashman and members of
the panel, ladles and gentlemen:
This isn't a formal statement of the Public
Health Service, but I have been asked to give some background
picture of the public Health Service interest in shellfish
sanitation.
I represent in the New York Regional Office
the Division of Environmental Engineering and Pood Protec-
tion of the Public Health Service, in which the National
Shellfish Sanitation Program resides.
As a result of typhoid fever and other outbreaks
in 1925> representatives of the shellfish industry and the
shellfish-producing States met with the Public Health
Service in a conference to determine what could be done about
formulating a program that would protect consumers from
contaminated shellfish, and reestablish confidence in this
product as a food among the shellfish consumers.
As a result of this conference, a voluntary
cooperative program, which is rather unusual in this country,
was established and has been in effect since that time.
Under this National Shellfish Sanitation Program,
each of the participating groups, the States, the Public
Health Service and the shellfish Industry, has accepted
certain specified responsibilities. I will outline the areas

-------
138
R. J. VanDerwerker
of responsibilities.
First, the State: Each shellfish-shipping State
adopts adequate laws and regulations for sanitary control
of the shellfish industry, makes sanitary and bacteriological
surveys of growing areas, delineates and patrols restricted
areas, inspects shellfish plants, and conducts such addi-
tional inspections, laboratory investigations and control
measures as may be necessary to Insure that the shellfish
reaching the consumer have been grown, harvested and
processed in a sanitary manner. The State annually issues
numbered certificates to shellfish dealers who comply with
the agreed-upon sanitary standards, and forwards copies of
the interstate certificates to the Public Health Service.
The Public Health Service makes an annual review
of each State's control program, including the inspection of
a representative number of shellfish-producing plants. On
the basis of the information thus obtained, the Public
Health Service either endorses or withholds endorsement of
the respective State control programs.
For the information of health authorities and
others concerned, the Public Health Service publishes a
semi-monthly list of all valid interstate shellfish shipper
certificates issued by the shellfish control authorities.
In addition, the Public Health Service carries

-------
139
R. J. VanDerwerker
on a shellfish and sanitation research program and assists
the States in investigating problems of unusual nature.
The laboratory for this work is situated in Rhode Island,
However, for the purpose of the National Shellfish
Sanitation Program, primary emphasis is placed upon the
continuing approval of State programs to determine that a
satisfactory level of sanitation is in fact maintained.
The industry cooperates by obtaining shellfish
from safe sources, by providing plants which meet the
agreed-upon sanitary standards, by maintaining sanitary
plant conditions, by placing the proper certificate number
on each package of shellfish, and by keeping and making
available to the control authorities records which show the
origin and disposition of all shellfish.
The controlling criteria and standards developed
by the Public Health Service and States are reviewed and
approved by the National Shellfish Sanitation Workshops,
convened periodically by the Public Health Service,
The workshops consist of representatives of
industry, State shellfish agencies, and the Public Health
Service,
The next workshop is scheduled for July of 1967.
We have a manual that is produced by the Public
Health Service. It consists of three parts. One has to do

-------
14 0
R. J. VanDerwerker
with the criteria for shellfish growing areas, and how
surveys shall be made, and this contains the criteria by
which areas are closed or approved or restricted; Part 2,
which has to do with the sanitary conditions in shucking
and packing plants; and Part 3, which has to do with the
procedures for appraisal of State shellfish sanitation
programs.
With this background, the statement of the Public
Health Service interest in the topic under discussion today
has been prepared.
I wish to introduce the Regional Shellfish
Consultant, Mr. George Morrison, who will present the formal
statement. Mr. Morrison is on my staff in the New York
Regional Office.
MR. STEIN: Do you have any questions or comments
of Mr. VanDerwerker?
MR. KLASHMAN: No, I do not.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Metzler?
MR. METZLER: I believe not at this time.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. VanDerwerker.
MR. VanDERWERKER: I will be back if you have
any later.
MR, STEIN: You know, when Mr. Klashman intro-
duced you as his old colleague, I took a double-take,

-------
14 X
G. Morrison
because I have probably been as old a colleague too. I
don't think he meant that "old" the way he said it.
MR. VanDERWERKER: Well, you could mean it that
way, but we have been long-time colleagues, all three of
you on the panel, and myself.
MR. STEIN: That is right.
I might say, you know, when Dwight was out in
Kansas, we really didn't emphasize this shellfish program
too much in the pollution problems there.
All right, thank you.
STATEMENT OF GEORGE MORRISON, REGIONAL
SHELLFISH SANITATION CONSULTANT, SHELLFISH
SANITATION BRANCH, DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
ENGINEERING AND FOOD PROTECTION, UNITED
STATES PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
MR. MORRISON: My name is George Morrison. I
am Regional Shellfish Sanitation Consultant representing
the Shellfish Sanitation Branch, Division of Environmental
Engineering and Food Protection, United States Public Health
Service. My statement of interest in the conference on
the abatement of pollution in Moriches Bay and the eastern

-------
142
G. Morrison
section of Great South Bay, Long Island, New York stems
from the responsibility of the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare for the health aspects of water
pollution control, and is made within the framework of the
National Shellfish Sanitation Program — a consumer-protection
oriented program administered jointly by the States and the
United States Public Health Service.
The National Shellfish Sanitation Program is
based upon the premise of a continuing safe and beneficial
use of shellfish as a natural resource. Great South Bay and
Moriches Bay support a valuable shellfish resource which
must be protected. Maintenance of acceptable sanitary
water quality over these shellfish beds is of paramount
importance in the ability of the shellfish to survive and
reproduce and to the growth of a safe product for direct
marketing as a food.
Data relative to the shellfish production and
potential in the waters of the Great South and Moriches
Bays have been or undoubtedly will be covered by other state-
ments presented at this conference. My statement of
interest will be directed toward the water quality condi-
tions of these bays as their quality interferes with,
lessens or destroys the use of shellfish harvested from the
area for use as a human food item.

-------
G. Morrison
Oysters, clams and mussels have an unusual
potential for the transmission of disease to man. This
unusual potential can be attributed to three factors:
(1)	The environmental growth tolerance of
shellfish is such that they ordinarily grow only
in estuaries in which there is an admixture of fresh
and salt water. However, the estuarine waters of
Moriches Bay and the east section of the Great
South Bay are receiving waters for waste discharges
from duck farms, municipal and domestic sewerage
systems, industrial operations and extensive com-
mercial and recreational water craft traffic.
(2)	Shellfish are filter feeders. In the
process of feeding, they pump large quantities of
water across their gill systems. Particulate
material and dissolved substances are removed and
concentrated to levels above that of the overlying
water. The Norther Quahog, (H&rd Clam - Mercenaria
mercenaria) the shellfish species in most abundance
in the Moriches and Great South Bay, during periods
of active feeding, can concentrate bacteria to a
level of 2.5 to 6.0 times that of the overlying
waters. The concentration factor for metals, radio-
nuclides, industrial wastes or pesticides is much

-------
G. Morrison
greater. For example, it has been reported that
the eastern oyster has a concentration factor of
17,000 for Zn65. 1/
(3) Shellfish are frequently consumed raw
or with little cooking. The entire animal is eaten.
It has been demonstrated many times that these
factors can combine to transmit human illness. A positive
relationship, therefore, exists between pollution of shell-
fish-growing areas and infectious disease and poisoning
from high metal concentrations. Typhoid fever has been
historically linked with polluted shellfish and in recent
years there has been evidence of possible transmission of
infectious hepatitis by raw shellfish. The possibility
also exists for the transmission of other enteric virus
infections by contaminated shellfish.
The primary sources of pollution in the bay
areas under discussion have been attributed to the waste
discharge from the several duck farm operations in the area,
duck processing waste, and sewage. The dangers of pollu-
tion from sewage waste are well known. However, the
dangers of pollution of animal origin have not been, until
recently, fully recognized. Recent studies of the relation-
ships of pathogenic to coliform organisms, when the source
of such coliforms is of duck origin, indicate a definite

-------
145
G. Morrison
I
public health menace exists in shellfish waters receiving waste
discharged from duck farms.
The major impurities in waste water from the Long
Island duck farms, I understand, are manure and waste grain.
The pollutional character of this waste is largely due to
two constituents of the duck droppings, namely, pathogenic
enteric microorganisms and unstable organic material, the
same two constituents that cause domestic waste to be so
objectionable in estuarine waters. The Salmonella group
of pathogenic organisms as an example have been demonstrated
to be present in ducks and duck droppings. 2/
The pathogenicity of Salmonella from ducks has
been demonstrated by cases of human salmonellosis resulting
from the ingestion of duck eggs or food prepared from them.
3, 4 / Studies have conclusively demonstrated the presence
m
of pathogens in the waste from Long Island duck farms and
the possibility of the transmission of these pathogens from
the farms through the shellfish waters and actually to the
shellfish. 5/ Shellfish-growing areas polluted by waste
discharge from duck farms and duck processing plants as well
as sanitary sewage should, therefore, be closed to the
harvesting of shellfish for marketing purposes, if the
sanitary quality of the water is inferior to the approved
area standards of the National Shellfish Sanitation Program

-------
146
G. Morrison
Manual of Operations, Part I, Sanitation of Shellfish
Growing Areas. 6/
For a shellfish-growing area to be approved for
the harvesting of shellfish, the classification must be
supported by a comprehensive sanitary survey which presents
evidence that pathogenic microorganisms, radionuclides and/
or harmful industrial wastes do not reach the area in dangerous
concentrations. As a measure of the relative safety of an
area, the median coliform MPN of the water must not exceed
70 per 100 ml, and a percentage of the samples taken must
not exceed an established count depending on the dilution
techniques used. The water sampling must obviously be made
of the waters in the area most probably exposed to con-
tamination during the most unfavorable hydrographic and
pollution conditions.
#
Considerable information on the extent and in-
fluence of pollution, and the sources of pollution to the bay
areas, has been or will be presented for the record of this
conference by the conferees. Suitable reduction in the
strength and volume of this waste discharge will afford
greater protection to the shellfish resources in the area
in providing a safer product for human consumption and
could result in the possible reopening of presently closed
areas. Such reduction of this pollution is obviously in

-------
147
G. Morrison
the interest of public health and will be supported by the
United States Public Health Service.
Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
¦ • *
You wanted your references included too?
MR. MORRISON: Yes.
MR. STEIN: Without objection, this will be done,
(The references referred to are as follows:
REFERENCES
1.	Effects of Atomic Radiation on Oceanography
and Fisheries, Publication No. 551> National Academy of
Sciences, National Research Council, 1957.
2.	Edwards, P. R., Brunes, D. W., and Moran,
A. B. "Salmonella Infections of Fowls." Cornell Vet:
38:247, 1948.
3.	Mallam, P. C. and Alhadeff, R. "Salmonella
Infections in Man Conveyed by Ducks' Eggs." Lancet 250:887
(June 15) 1946.
4.	Snapper, I. "Salmonellosis Caused by In-
gestion of Ducks' Eggs." American J. Digest Pis 11:8-10,
1944.
5.	Bidwell, M. H., and Kelley, C. B., "Ducks
and Shellfish Sanitation." Amer. Jour. Pub. Health, 40,

-------
G. Morrison
148
9?3, (1950).
6. National Shellfish Sanitation Program Manual
of operations, Part I Sanitation of Shellfish Growing Area,
1965 Revision, U. S. Dept. of HEW, Public Health Service,
Washington, D, C.)
* * *
MR. STEIN: Are there any questions or comments
on this statement?
MR. METZLER: No.
MR. KLASHMAN: No.
MR, STEIN: If not, thank you very much,
Mr. Klashman?
MR. KLASHMAN: Are there any other Federal
agencies represented here who wish to make a statement?
(No response. )
MR. KLASHMAN: If not, Mr. Stein, I would like
to enter in the record a resolution which we have received
from the Fire Island National Seashore Advisory Commission.
MR. STEIN: Would you read it?
MR. KLASHMAN: Yes.
This letter is from Qeorge Biderman, Chairman,
Fire Island National Seashore Advisory Commission, located

-------
1^9
at 30 East *42nd Street, New York City, New York.
"In connection with your current hearings
on Great South Bay water pollution problems, I
would like to enter in the record the following
resolution which was passed unanimously by the
Fire Island National Seashore Advisory Commission
at its meeting of February 23, 1966:
"•Resolved that the Fire Island
National Seashore Advisory Commission urge
the establishment of an appropriate inter-
governmental partnership from local, state
and federal agencies for research planning
and policy formulation for the preservation
of the natural values of the Great South
Bay. Furthermore, be it resolved that this
effort should be directed toward the estab-
lishment of a more formal intergovernmental
agreement among local, state and federal
authorities concerning the management and
administration of this valuable natural resource.'
"As you know, a large proportion of the southerly
boundary of Great South Bay is within the boundaries
of the Fire Island National Seashore and pollution
of this area is, therefore, a matter of concern to
the Commission."

-------
Thank you, Mr. Stein.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
By the way, there is nothing in the record on this
except this first resolution here, but if there is any
more information on an intergovernmental agreement, of course
we will be glad to hear it and consider it.
Mr. Klashman, do you have any other statements?
MR. KLASHMAN: Mr. Stein, that completes the
presentation by the Federal agencies.
MR. STEIN: At this point, we would like to
proceed with the presentation of the statements from New
York State.
Now, under the Federal law, as we have pointed
out, the conferees are the Federal Government and New York
State. New York State manages its own time and its own
participants.
We will call on Mr. Metzler, who will be in
charge of this. Anyone who wishes to speak from New York
State should be in touch with Mr. Metzler. He will arrange
for their presentation.
Mr. Metzler?
MR. METZLER: Thank you, Mr. Stein.
By way of arrangement, so that you may be
budgeting your time, because I am aware of the great

-------
151
responsibility we have to make the best use of the time of
each one of you, may I suggest how we would propose to
proceed from this point with the New York witnesses?
We have three State witnesses, and I would
propose that they speak first. There are two additional
county officials, who will speak next, and then there are
ten others, who represent various groups, or wanted to speak
as individuals, who have given me their names.
I would hope, on the basis of the information I
have at hand at the moment, that if we were willing to work
until five o'clock or a little later, we might be able to
hear all of those people who have indicated up until now a
desire to be heard.
Is that agreeable to you, Mr. Chairman?
MR. STEIN: Yes. As I pointed out, in view of the
fact that Senator Kennedy has indicated that he will be here
tomorrow, we will be in session tomorrow as of present
indications, and you can arrange your schedule accordingly.
MR. METZLER: We have a very close cooperative
working relationship in New York State in the development
of policy relating to water resources. This, by all odds,
is the most progressive .thing that has happened at the
State level along the Eastern Seaboard, I am sure.
We have the Water Resources Commission, that is

-------
152
P. W. Montanari
a policy-forming agency, and here to speak for the Water
Resources Commission today is Mr. Montanari, Assistant
Commissioner for Water.
STATEMENT OF P. W. MONTANARI, ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK STATE CONSERVATION
DEPARTMENT, DIVISION OP WATER RESOURCES
MR. MONTANARI: It seems that we have lost the
Chairman for a moment. I guess that is all right. Actually,
you have the statement before you and I will go through it
quickly.
I am F. W. Montanari, Assistant Commissioner,
New York State Conservation Department, Division of Water
Resources.
In addition to Pure Waters, which is the keystone
of the New York State Water Resources Program, it is important
that the conferees know about the many related programs in order
to be in a position to develop such effective conclusions as
may result from this conference.
After all, with this much talent and energy, I am
sure we want to get the job done right.
In Cleveland, at the Lake Erie conference last
year, the Chairman, Mr. Stein, made a basic point which I

-------
153
P. W. Montanari
heard from him for the first time there. It is a most
important one. He pointed out the need for the regional
approach to pollution control, and the need for comprehensive
planning so that the Job might be properly accomplished.
As you have just heard, in New York State there
is a single agency, the Water Resources Commission, responsible
not only for policy in all matters affecting the State's
water resources, but also for multi-purpose planning and
coordination of State agency activities in the water resources
field. The attached compendium, and I think you all have
this and we will enter this as part of the record, because
it will serve as a useful reference, is entitled "The
Coordinated Program for the Water Resources of New York
State." It describes the legal and administrative structure,
including interstate compacts, and the many current planning
programs. Considerable emphasis is given to the subject
of water pollution control.
(The document referred to will be
contained in the files of the
Department as an exhibit.)
State legislation enacted in 1959 provides for
local planning. Local entitles, such as counties, may apply
for State assistance in comprehensive, multi-purpose watefr
resources planning. When a petition for aid is approved, the

-------
15 ^
P. W. Montanari
State pays seventy-five percent of the cost of the study and
provides necessary staff facilities. A seven-man board,
composed of local leaders residing within the area under
consideration, is appointed by the Water Resources Commis-
sion, and it is the board itself which has the responsibility
for evolving the plans. At the present time, we have three
such boards in operation in other parts of the State, and
seven in various steps of formation. Interest in this board
approach has been evidenced here on Long Island in conjunction
with other planning activities, and I think you have heard
of the bi-county planning effort, the Office for Planning
Coordination, which are just a couple of examples of on-
going locally-oriented planning efforts.
Long Island, as I am sure you know, is a very
dynamic and special place. Much has been done locally, and
there are great opportunities, desires and capacity for
local participation in any of the affairs which affect the
Island, and I think this is a particular characteristic of
the Island. I don't think I had seen it quite to the extent
that I have witnessed here on Long Island, the intense
participation and interest in local affairs, and a real do-
it-yourself spirit. It is exactly this type of environment
which is best suited for regional board activity under local
leadership.

-------
155
P. W. Montanari
The regional board mechanism is designed to
provide for the integration and coordination of all efforts
at the local level — including, importantly, the Federal
efforts. Last year, for example, Section 214 of the Rivers
and Harbors Act of 1965 provided the authority to the Corps
of Engineers to undertake water resources planning in coopera-
tion with the State of New York, In a statement on behalf
of the State of New York, the request for the sum of
$500,000 was made, with the request that $300,000 be dedicated
to the start of a hydraulic model for the Great South Bay by
the U. S. Corps of Engineers.
Mr. Panuzio mentioned another effort to achieve
this model, which some of us think is quite basic.
Testimony you have heard and will hear will indi-
cate the need for such scientific approach to solving the
problems of this great marine resource, and that is exactly
what you are dealing with.
9
For years, a matching fund program with the U. S.
Geological Survey has been carried out here on Long Island
as part of statewide activities. The dimension of thiB
matching fund program is now nearly a million dollars,
with one-half, of course, being supplied by New York. The
State, through the Water Resources Commission and its

-------
156
F. W. Montanari
member agencies, is involved on a continuing basis with
activities of many other Federal agencies, including, but
not limited to, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Corps of
Engineers, the Public Health Service, the Soil Conservation
Service, and now the new Federal Water pollution Control
Administration.
Under Federal impetus, there has been a prolifera-
tion of water-related programs, which, taken together, may
tend to confuse the people. The most significant Federal
planning programs affecting Long Island directly in the
water resources field include the following:
(1)	Hudson-Mohawk-Champlain Intercoastal
Metropolitan Study. The Federal Water Pollution Control
Agency has been authorized to conduct a comprehensive water
pollution control study which was initially estimated to
take seven years and cost $12 million to complete. Water
quality goals can only be established with full consideration
and evaluation of all other aspects of comprehensive water
resources planning and development and with the full par-
ticipation of State agencies.
This, of course, is going on as a part of the
program of our New York State Water Resources Commission.
(2)	North Atlantic Regional Water Resources
Study. This $4 million study embracing 13 States, the

-------
157
P. W. Montanari
District of Columbia, and five Federal agencies, with the
North Atlantic Division, Corps of Engineers, serving as
chairman of the coordinating committee, was initiated in
January 1966. New York State is a member of this committee.
A plan of study has been evolved calling for completion of
the study by 1970. This is a framework type study which
will produce broad-brush results.
(3) North East United States Water Supply Study.
The previous study was NAR, and this is NEWS.
This study was authorized in October 1965 under Public Law
89-298 and covers the same 13 States and the District of
Columbia cited for the North Atlantic Regional Water
Resources Study. However, in this water supply study all of
New York State is involved except the Erie-Niagara and
Allegheny River Basins. It is understood that funds will
be forthcoming to initiate the study in the appropriation
bill for Fiscal Year 19&7• In this study, the Chief of the
Corps of Engineers is authorized to cooperate with Federal,
State and local agencies in preparing a plan in accordance
with the Water Resources Planning Act (PL 89-80) to meet the
long-range water needs of the Northeastern United States.
These Federal programs, among others, must necessarily be
fully integrated and coordinated with the many studies
being performed by State and local agencies. This is

-------
158
F. W. Montanari
particularly true In Long Island. The Ideal mechanism
for achieving this is, as previously indicated, the Water
Resources Commission at the State level and the regional
water resources planning and development board established
under the provisions of Part V, Article V of the New York
State Conservation Law at the local level.
We would submit that not only is the State
willing, but is able, through its legal and administrative
structure and through personnel which have been recently
acquired, to implement "Pure Waters" and other complementary
programs affecting the water resources of the people of
Long Island as an important part of the Empire State.
We feel that we have a complete water resources
program, and, as I indicated in the beginning, the Pure
Waters is indeed the keystone of this.
Unless we have waters we can manage, we have
really nothing to work with.
We look to the Federal establishment for its
vital contribution to the partnership that our Federalist
system of government is today.
Thank you.
Before I step down, Mr. Stein, you weren't here
at the beginning.
Mr, Stein told us that he has been paying a

-------
P. W. Montanari
dollar and a dollar and a half for a half a dozen clams.
Down here at the Lamplighter, I had some delicious clams.
There were a half a dozen of them and I brought the menu
back in case he would like to have it for part of the
record. The price of the clams here is 60 cents for a half
a dozen.
Now, Murray, maybe if you take this back to
Washington, you can get a reduction on the clams you have
been eating.
MR. STEIN: I doubt it, I really did say a
dollar or a dollar and a quarter. They have not charged
us $1.50 yet.
By the way, Monty, as long as we are on that,
on these local boards, what would you call the board if you
had a local board like that on the south shore of Long
Island?
MR. MONTANARI: On the south shore of Long
Island?
MR. STEIN: Yes.
MR. MONTANARI: I think Mr. Dennison indicated
that Long Island must be handled pretty much as a unit.
There have been many activities that have tended along that
line.
Unless I am very badly mistaken, it seems that
Nassau and Suffolk — now, in Suffolk, this is a bad thing

-------
160
P. W. Montanari
to say, I realize — but Nassau and Suffolk are a logical
unit that ought to be planning, working and managing their
resources together. They do have a bi-county —
MR. STEIN: In other words, this would be the
whole island — north and south shore?
MR. MONTANARI: Yes.
MR. STEIN: All right.
MR. MONTANARI: I don't think that you can
separate the water because of the groundwater, which is so
important to everybody.
MR. STEIN: Yes. You know, I had a horrible
vision, Monty, that you were going to have this just on the
south shore — you might call it the surf board.
(Laughter.)
MR. MONTANARI: Some day I am going to get even.
I am not going to be one up on him, but I am going to get
even.
MR. STEIN: Are there any comments or questions?
MR. METZLER: No.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Klashman?
MR. KLASHMAN: No. I have no comments.
MR. STEIN: By the way, this is a very excellent
statement, and, as far as I know, at least speaking for

-------
P. w. Montanari	g
myself, we are in complete agreement with it.
I think we have come a long way in this State-
Federal-local cooperative arrangement. I think it has
taken a long time, and this is its natural evolution, for
us to work out a cooperative program.
I do think despite what you may say are essential
political differences, that the Federal and State programs,
at least in New York State, are working together very closely,
as evidenced by the statements here.
However, you must recognize too that there is a
big element here. I do not think that the Federal Govern-
ment or the State government can do this alone unless we
have local cooperation. This is a three-way operation --
Federal, State and local — and I hope I am speaking for all
of us when I say we are ready to meet you at least half-
way — more than half way; but this job is not going; to be
done, no matter how good we may think we are, Monty and
Dwight, just by the State and the Federal Government, unless
we have the local people with us.
If you want clean water here and work with us
and use the resources, I think we are in a position now
where we are really working closely on the Federal and State
level and can offer you that aid. I think your paper
evidences that, Monty.
Thank you very much.

-------
162
R. D. Hennigan
MR. MONTANARI: I think that you would agree
with me, Murray, and I have heard your boss, Secretary
Udall, use these words, that creative Federalism is still
a viable form of government today, and it is up to us to
make it work.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Metzler:
MR. METZLER: Thank you, Murray.
The next witness from New York State will be
Mr. Robert Hennigan, in charge of the Water Pollution
Control Program for the State of New York Pure Waters
Program.
STATEMENT OP ROBERT D. HENNIGAN, DIRECTOR
OP WATER RESOURCE SERVICES, STATE OF NEW
YORK DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
MR. HENNIGAN: Mr. Chairman, conferees and
ladies and gentlemen:
We have prepared here a 63-page report which I
don't intend to read. What I will do is brief most of it
and present some remarks, which I hope won't take any longer

-------
R. D. Hennlgan
than five or six minutes.
I would request the Chairman to include the
entire report in the minutes of the conference as if read
in its entirety.
MR. STEIN: Without objection, that will be done.
(The report referred to is as follows:
REPORT ON WATER QUALITY
MORICHES BAY AND THE
EASTERN SECTION OP GREAT SOUTH BAY
LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK
Division of Pure Waters
New York State Department of Health
Albany, New York
September 1966
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
The following report was prepared for presentation
at the Federal Enforcement Conference on Pollution of the
Waters of Moriches Bay and the Eastern Section of Great
South Bay, scheduled to be conducted on September 20, 21

-------
R. D. Hennigan	164
and 22, 1966, at Patchogue, New York.
The Department of Interior report, POLLUTION
OF THE NAVIGABLE WATERS OF MORICHES BAY AND EASTERN SECTION
OF GREAT SOUTH BAY - September, 1966, describes generally the
factors affecting water quality in the study area, which is
the subject of the Conference. The purpose of this report
is to augment the information in the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration report and to be responsive to the
issues raised. This report is only a portion of New York
State's presentation. Information and data directly relating
to shellfish sanitation, supervision and control will be
presented separately by tine State Department of Conservation.
The reports represent Federal-State-local
cooperative efforts since the inforr/iation in them is drawn
from reports prepared by and activities carried out by agencie
at all levels of government; this reemphasizes the inter-
governmental nature of this problem and the need for an
effective Federal-State-local partnership to assure its
eventual solution.
The report contains (a) recommendations, (b)
summary of action, (c) hydrography, (d) classification and
ot andards cystera, (e ) order issued on duc 1c farms, and (f)
tabulations of (1) municipal and industrial waste discharges
of present conditions, (2) analyses of effluents from duck

-------
165
R. D. Hennigan
farms, and (3) viater quality of receiving streams as shown by
samples collected in August, 1966.
The study area is a small part of the total
Long Island picture concerning water quality management and
the water resource problems. This was alluded to by Doctor
Ingraham in his remarks. All of us recognize this. The
conference called on the study area concerns itself funda-
mentally with the protection of shellfish through the
elimination of pollution and other needed action, and focuses
on the duck farm industry. The report deals with this area
and these concerns.
There are three major elements in this problem:
(l) elimination of pollution at its source by effective
treatment at the duck farms and the other sources of pollution
in the area; (2) dredging to remove existing sludge banks and
deposits where they adversely affect water quality and water
use; and (3) maintenance of the inlets fco Moriches Bay and
Great South Bay to insure desirable tidal action and flushing.
There are other concerns in evaluating the total water
quality and water resources management picture on the south
shore of Long Island.
All of the duck farms have recently been put
under a new order and timetable which calls for secondary
treatment with 85 percent removal of suspended solids and

-------
166
R. D. Hennigan
biological oxygen demand and the effective disinfection and
removal of phosphates. Recent research studies indicate that
this can be accomplished. The Patchogue Sewer District will
either be included in the proposed county sewer district or
will proceed unilaterally to provide secondary treatment.
The schedule has been worked out with the poultry processing
plant and the order will be issued in the near future adhering
to the schedule followed with the duck farms. Removal of
existing sludge banks and steps to Insure the needed tidal
action in both bays needs to be definitely spelled out in a
future program of action.
Suffolk County has done much on Its own to seek
solutions to existing problems. The county has financed and
conducted an independent research study on duok waste treat-
ment methods, has expended county funds to maintain inlets
and waterways and has most recently pledged up to $450,000
in support of a comprehensive intermunicIpal public water
supply study which will give adequate attention to water
quality problems.
The material presented In this report is intended
to facilitate the deliberations of the conferees by (1)
making recommendations for action and (2) providing up-to-
date information on water quality, pollutlonal sources,
comprehensive planning and enforcement.

-------
16?
R. D. Hennigan
New York State Recommendations
to the Federal Government
1.	A concerted effort should be made to stabilize
Moriches Inlet and to dredge estuaries to improve
conditions of tidal flushing. This is essential
to obtain optimum use of the tidal areas for
recreational and commercial activities such as
boating, fishing, swimming and for the harvesting
of shellfish.
2.	Provide incentives for industry to construct
waste treatment facilities.
3.	Increase construction grants. Residents of
Suffolk County face tremendous costs in providing
both collection and treatment facilities to serve
the five western towns of the county.
Research on algal nutrients and economic
methods to remove these nutrients from both
municipal and industrial wastes must be accelerated
and conclusions reached.
HYDROGRAPHY OF THE AREA
The following Information is presented in

-------
168
R. D, Bennlgan
summary form limited to pertinent details to facilitate under-
standing and discussion of the problems by those appearing
before the conferees.
The study area under investigation on the south
shore of Long Island, New York, includes:
1.	Moriches Bay, west of the Quantuck Canal;
2.	The eastern end of Great South Bay, east of a line
connecting Blue Point and Water Island,
(Note: Hydrologically, the eastern portion of
Great South Bay cannot be isolated by drawing
this north-south line. The bay functions as a
unit body of water being influenced by tides,
temperatures, rainfall, etc., as a whole.)
3.	Patchogue Bay, Bellport Bay, and Marrow Bay, the
waterway which connects Great South Bay and
Moriches Bay.
4.	The coves, rivers, streams, and estuaries
tributary to the bays.
Moriches Bay and Great South Bay are protected
on the south from the Atlantic Ocean by a narrow sand bar.
The bar in some places is but a few hundred yards wide.
These bays are very shallow. Depths vary from
one to eleven (ll) feet. The average depth is about four (4)
feet.

-------
169
R. D. Hennigan
MORICHES BAY
Length - 9 miles;
Width - 2 to 4 miles;
Area - 10,770 acres (approximate);
Depth - 4 ft. (mean low water)
Location - Towns of Brookhaven and Southampton,
County of Suffolk, New York
Tide - Mean tidal range - 0.6 ft. (approximate)
Low tidal range - 0.2 ft. (when Moriches
Inlet is severely restricted)
Division of Bay
Moriches Bay is effectively divided at
Tuthill Point. Shoals form around the
inlet and narrow the Bay at this point.
Fresh Water Supply
Numerous tributaries and ground water
drain into Moriches Bay.
Watershed area - 80 sq. miles;
Mean average rainfall - 4-3.93 inches;
Fresh Water
Inflow
Million
ft. 3/day
Rainfall on
watershed
24.6
22.31
Evaporation
from watershed
3.57
3.24
Ground water seepage
16.5
15.0
River flow

^53.
4.17
Total
inflow to Bay
21.03
19.07

-------
170
R. D. Hennlgan
(Based on 48.5 Inches of rainfall during sampling period.)
Source: "The Hydrography of Great South Bay and Moriches Bay."
A. G. Redfield
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Reference No. 52-26 April 1952. Unpublished.
Tidal Effects
Inlet open: Mean tidal volume flow-"" about 660 x (10) cubic
feet with a net outflow of about 10 x (10)^ cubic
feet per tidal cycle.
Inlet closed; Mean tidal volume flow I about 220 x (10)^ cubic
feet per tidal cycle with net outflow of about
10 x (10)^ cubic feet.
The outflow is about 10 x (10)^ cubic feet greater
ft
per tide at all times to account for about 20 x (10)° cubic
feet per day of runoff and seepage entering Moriches Bay.
Outflow depends on widely varying annual precipitation.
Source:	Moriches Bay
Shellfish Growing Area VIII
Survey Report - 1966
State of New York:
Conservation Report
Bureau of Marine Fisheries
Moriches Inlet
Tidal flow is influenced at eaoh point of exchange

-------
171
R. D. Hennigan
by the condition of Moriches Inlet.
Inlet closed - about 85$ of total flow is through Narrow
Bay and 15# through Quantuch Canal. Total
c
volume flow - 226 x (10) cubic feet per tide.
Inlet partially closed - about 19$ of total flow was through
Narrow Bay, V$> through Quantuck Canal,
and 66$ through Moriches Inlet. Total
volume flow = 3^-8 x (10)^ cubic feet
per tide
Source: U. S. Army Engineers July 13# 19^9.
Water Movement
The net movement of water is westward through
Narrow Bay when Moriches Inlet is open.
The tide from Moriches Inlet reaohes Smith Point
approximately ^0 minutes ahead of the tide from Fire Island
Inlet. This introduces large volumes of Moriches water into
Bellport Bay.
(Source: See A. G. Redfield, Above)
Inflow from Quantuck Canal
Total flow through the Canal is low compared to
that through the Inlet and Narrow Bay. This is about 15$ of
the total, when inlet is closed; and about 1C$ when inlet is
open.
Total flow through the Canal with inlet closed
is about 60$ of flow with inlet open.

-------
172
R. D. Hennlgan
(31,000,000 vs 54,000,000 cu. ft./day)
(Source: See A. G. Redfield, above)
Tidal Action In Moriches Bay
1.	With Inlet open, tidal action from Tuthi11 Point east is
directly influenced by the inlet.
2.	At extreme eastern end of Moriches Bay tidal action is
affected by passage of water through Quantuck Canal.
3.	The bay west of Tuthill Point experiences tidal action
through Narrow Bay with net westward movement.
Tidal exchange with the inlet in this section
increases from Forge River eastward.
4.	Salinity data indicates that this does occur.
(Note: Samples could not be colleoted at all stations
on the same dates.)
Source : Moriches Bay
Shellfish Growing Area VIII
Survey Report - 1966
State of New York
Conservation Department
Tidal stages were calculated from U. S. Coast
and Geodetic Survey tide tables.
5.	Average volume of water transported through Moriches
Inlet increased 2(from 115 to 140 million cubic feet)
from 1950 when inlet was closing to 1954 after the inlet
was opened.

-------
6.
173
R, D. Hennigan
The ratio of exchange between Moriches Inlet and
Smith Point increased from 2:1 to 3:1 J and the flow past
Smith Point decreased when the Inlet was opened.
The data is for one day.
Source: Data from—
Hydrography of Great South Bay and Moriches Bay;
Vaccaro, R. P.; Bumpus, D. F.j Ryther, F. A.;
and Richards, F. A.
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Reference No. 5^-85. July 195^. Unpublished.
Extreme variation from short-term measurements is shown
by A. G. Redfield's data (reference above):
Narrow Bay at Smith Point
Million Cubic Feet Per Tide
Inlet Open
Inlet Closed
12521
1950'
1251!
22511
Eastward	11 76.3
Westward	55 56.6
a - U. S. Army Engineers
b - Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institution
c - "Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institution
d - Suffolk County Highway Dept.
93.0	81.8
100.6 101.6
1 Tidal Cycle
8 Tides eastward
4- Tides westward
k Tides Cycle
215 Tidal cycles eastward
208 Tidal cycles westward

-------
YJK
R. D. Hennigan
7. Coneluslon
The hydrography of Moriches Bay is dependent on
the status of Moriches Inlet.
The status of Moriches Inlet dictates total
volume flow per tide and circulatory patterns in the bay.
The bay is shallow within a small tidal range,
and is often influenced by winds.
The bay experiences extreme low or high water
depending on intensity, duration and direction of winds.
Tides may fail to reverse at Smith Point because
of wind action, and the averages apply only during calm
weather (According to A. G. Redfield, see above).
Circulatory patterns in the bay will be influenced
by dredging operations.
Source: Moriches Bay
Shellfish Growing Area VIII
Survey Report - 1966
State of New York
Conservation Department
GiiEAT SOUTH BAY
Total length - 24 miles;
Width (Average) - 3 miles;
Area - 95 sq. miles

-------
175
R. D. Hennlgan
That portion of Great South Bay under this investigation:
Length - 8 miles
Width - 2 to b miles.
Fresh Water Supply
Natural seaward discharge from the Long Island groundwater.
Some surface streamflow.
Relatively, the volumes of fresh water entering Great
South Bay are low.
Salt Water Supply
Sea water enters Great South Bay through Fire Island and
Moriches Inlets. Sufficient sea water enters to maintain dis-
tribution of salt In the bays.
Water Movement
Volumes of 'new' sea water, available for mixing in eaoh
tidal cycle appear to be very small except at the inlets.
Circulation in the bays appearb to be caused by the
progressive effect of tides. This develops substantial
hydraulic currents in the narrow connecting channels because
»
of shallow depths and different lengths of the bays.
When the Fire Island and Moriches Inlets are both open,
water movement is easterly from Great South Bay into Moriches
Bay.
When Moriches Inlet is closed by silting, water movement
is westerly.

-------
176
R. D. Hennigan
About 20 million cubic feet appears to move from Great
South Bay and Bellport Bay into Moriches Bay during one tidal
cycle with both inlets open. (July 1950 measurements).
Tidal Circulation and Wind
Wind induced currents can nullify or even reverse tidal
flow.
For example, the equivalent of about two-thirds of volume
of Moriches Bay was moved westward into Bellport Bay in
November 1951. This resulted from a persistent four-day
wind -which increased the flow between the two bays. Moriches
Inlet was closed at the time so that normal flow was westward.
Prevailing winds during summer are light westerly. These
generally induce patterns which increase normal circulation
of bay water. Water from Great South Bay is shifted to
Bellport Bay. This raised the hydraulic gradient on Smith
Point and moves water into Moriches Bay.
These conditions also move Moriches Bay water east
through Potunk Point Narrows into Shinnecock Bay.
Water Currents
Maximum Flow per Tidal Area
Fire Island Inlet	8 fps	2.0 billion cu. ft.
Moriches Inlet	6 fps	0,2 billion cu. ft.

-------
177
R. D, Hennigan
Net Seaward Flow
The net seaward flow through Moriches Inlet
has been measured at 18 million cubic feet per tidal cycle.
Tidal Currents
In open bays, the maximum tidal current is about
0.5 foot per second.
The east-west tidal excursion is approximately
1.5 miles.
The net drift, based on a few measurements, may
be as high as one mile per day.
Flushing
The western portions of Great South Bay appear
to be flushed in four (4) to ten (10) days time.
Tidal Ranges	Mean
Fire Island Inlet 4.1 ft,
Moriches Inlet	2.9 ft.
Bellport	0.8 ft.
Mastic Beach	0.5 ft.
Maximum storm tide (November 1950) was 9.4 feet
above mean sea level at Fire Island Inlet.
Tidal Circulation and Stratification
The tides are generally sufficient to prevent
stratifioation in open bays.
Stratification does occur, however, near inlets
and rivers.

-------
178
R. D. Hennigan
Temperatures
VJater Temperatures - 0° - 30° C
The highest temperatures are found in shallow
areas and in upper parts of estuaries during summer.
Salinity
Salinity of water ranges from zero in upper
parts of estuaries to 30,000 ppm in open portions of bay.
Circulation in Bays
Circulation in the bays is weak.
This limits the volume of available dilution of
water.
This condition is further aggravated by winds
and currents which tend to confine waters to the eastern end
of Great South Bay.
Bellport Bay
Definition: Most easterly section of Great South Bay,
including all waters between a line drawn due south
from Howell Point to Fire Island, and the Smith Point
Bridge.
Total Area - 5,480 acres under water
Source: Report of 1964
Bellport Bay Survey
Conservation Department
Division of Pish and Game
State of New York

-------
R. D. Hennigan
179
SUMMARY OF ACTION
All duck farms have altered the method of raising ducks
by removing pens from open water.
Pumping facilities and upland lagoons have been
installed. Note: Two farms have stopped use of
treatment facilities constructed under Federal grant.
Lagoon facilities have been in operation for two years.
The duck farm industry has an inspection and surveillance
program which includes all farms. Reports on main-
tenance and operation evaluations by industry are
provided to the Suffolk County Health Department.
Suffolk County in cooperation with the duck growing
industry has sponsored an initial $18,000 study on
treatment methods.
The duck industry is conducting a further study on
secondary treatment methods. Construction contracts
have been let for construction of a 50,000 gpd.
secondary treatment facility. Study and construction
costs provided by Industry will total $25,000. The
New York State Department of Health is providing
laboratory services for this project.
All duck farmers have stipulated to pollution and
are under formal order.

-------
180
R. D. Hennigan
The State of New York is assisting the county with its
comprehensive study efforts. A study of the sewage
needs of the five western towns is nearing completion.
An application for a similar study for the five eastern
towns is approved and will soon be under way. A
county-wide water supply study is under way. Planning
grants to the county currently total $1,000,605. The
county has agreed to augment this amount by $4-50,000
in connection with the water supply study,
A county sewer agency was formed and has moved rapidly
in the past year and a half to provide needed collection
and treatment facilities for populated areas. A
referendum on District #1 will be conducted early
next year.
The 1966 State Legislature enacted legislation providing
for the control of waste discharges from boats. The
legislation provides for approval of holding tanks and
treatment facilities as well as onshore treatment works
by the State Health Department. Enforcement activity
is the general responsibility of the State Conservation
Department.

-------
R. D. Hennigan
181
Typical Duck Farm Construction and
	Abatement Steps	
The duck farms presently operating in the area
under consideration are constructed as follows:
Ducks are housed in buildings with free access
to a sand covered duck run. The end of this run is either
into a ditch or a concrete trough. All water from this ditch
or trough goes to a sump at the low end of the duck runs where
it is pumped upto a series of two or more settling lagoons,
which provide a form of primary treatment.
Each lagoon is used 30 days or until sludge
bulks on the surface. The lagoon is then taken out of service
and allowed to dry. Upon drying, the lagoon is dredged and
the sludge is used for landfill. Pinal effluent is then
discharged to the receiving waters. Ducks are not raised in
natural waters.
The State abatement program in 1951 required
that duck raisers first dike all duck pens so that ducks are
not raised on natural waters. This has been accomplished in
the study area.
The second step of the abatement program called
for effective settling of all duck wastes. This was done by

-------
182
R. D. Hennigan
providing a series of upland lagoons to provide 4-hour settling
for the wastes. It is recommended that an adequate number of
lagoons be provided to handle a full year's flow.
Step number three of the program called for
effective disinfection of all water prior to discharge. This
part of the program has not yet been accomplished.
With re-evaluation of the total State Pure
Waters Program in 1965> the abatement program for the duck
wastes was expanded as indicated in the order on the following
page. All duck farms on Long Island have had orders issued by
the State.

-------
R. D. Hennigan
183
example OP TYPICAL ORDER
STATE OP NEW YORK : DEPARTMENT OP HEALTH
-	-	—	X
IN THE MATTER of the Complaint against :
Poultry Farm,
Respondent,
by Reason of Alleged Violations of Article 12 of
the Public Health Law.
		-	—X
STATE OP NEW YORK i DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
						X
IN THE MATTER of the Hearing to Receive
Evidence Relevant to such Action, if any, as should
be Taken in Regard to Modification or Revocation
of Permits to Discharge Waste Effluents into
issued to;
Poultry Farm,
Respondent,
or the Predecessors or Assignors
	X
ORDER
A public hearing in the above entitled proceedings
having been returnable herein pursuant to due written notice

-------
184
R. D. Hennigan
served in the manner provided by law and the convening of said
hearing having been waived by the parties and the New York
State Department of Health having appeared generally therein
by its Counsel, DONALD A. MacHARG, DERMOT C. REILLY of Counsel,
and the Respondents having appeared generally therein by their
Attorneys, GREENWALD, KOVNER & GOLDSMITH of New York City,
and documentary exhibits having been received on behalf of
said Department, and said Counsel for said Department and
said Attorneys for Respondent having entered into a written
Stipulation that facts exist upon which this Order might be
made, served and filed, and said Hearing Officer having
approved said Stipulation,
NOW, on reading and filing the notice of hearing
and admission of service thereof and stipulation and due
deliberation having been had, it is ORDERED;
1.	THAT the Stipulation aforesaid be and the
same hereby is approved and the facts therein are found and
the conclusions therein are arrived at,
2.	THAT all Orders of the Water Pollution
Control Board of the State of New York directed to or against
the Respondents or any of them be and they hereby are modified
to provide that the Respondents shall, and each of said
Respondents is hereby Ordered and directed, on and after
January 2, 1967* to cease and abate, and thereafter keep

-------
185
R. D. Hennigan
abated, all discharges of duck wastes and duck processing
wastes by him or it through or from lands or facilities
owned by him or it or under his or its management or control
into the waters of the State unless said Respondent shall,
either individually or in conjunction with others:
(a)	On or before January 1, 1967> submit to the
New York State Department of Health, through the Suffolk County
Health Department, 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 an MPN of coliform organisms not
greater than 100 per 100 ml. in at least 90# of the samples in
a Beries 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.

-------
R. D. Hennigan
(c)	On or before November 1, 1967, initiate con-
struction of such facilities.
(d)	On or before April 30, 1968, cause construc-
tion of such facilities in accordance with approved plans to
be completed.
(e)	Thereafter maintain and operate said facili-
ties 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 Respondents or to any of them or any of their pre-
decessors 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 modified, 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, and as so modified, are continued.
DATED; Albany, New York
1966

-------
R. D. Hennlgan
187
HOLLIS S. INGRAHAM, M.D,
Commissioner of Health of
the State of New York
TO: WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION
GREENWALD, KOVNER & GOLDSMITH
Attorneys for Respondent
# * *
INDUSTRIAL AND MUNICIPAL DISCHARGES
The following table lists all known sources of
industrial and municipal pollution within the study area.
A brief description of the waste discharged and an estimate
of the volume are included.
The table also includes a description of the treat-
ment provided at the present time. At the time of the most
recent inspection, two farms were not using their lagoon
facilities and two additional farms had abandoned use of a
town-owned treatment works.

-------
TABLE 1
INDUSTRIAL ASO municipal DISCHARGES
Moriches and Great	South Bays
Name	Type & Amount	Treatment
Gallo Bros.	duck farm	upland lagoons
Leskowicz	duck farm 1.3 mgd	upland lagoons
Carmen River	duck farm	upland lagoons
Paul Chonoma	duck farm	upland lagoons
De Piazzy	duck farm	upland lagoons
Jurgielewicz	duck farm &	upland lagoons
processing plant
Characteristics of Discharges
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content and duck
slaughtering wastes
Swift Stream
duck farm
upland lagoons
turbid discharge with
setfcleable solids and high
coliform content

-------
INDUSTRIAL & MUNICIPAL DISCHARGES (cont.)
Name	Type and Amount
Podlaski	duck farm
Vigliotta 6c Son
A. Soroka
Adam Kanas
Breezy Acres
Zygmunt Babinski
Chester Massey & Son
Big Seatuck Farm
duck farm 50 gpm
duck farm
duck farm 250 gpm
duck farm 250 gpm
duck farm
duck farm 200 gpm
duck farm 100 gpm
Peter Kostxik & Son
duck farm 100 gpm
Treatment
upland lagoons
upland lagoons
leaching lagoons
upland lagoons
upland lagoons
upland lagoons and
spray irrigation
upland lagoons
upland lagoons
upland lagoons
Characteristics of Discharges
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content	M
03
KO

-------
INDUSTRIAL & MUNICIPAL
Name
Borak Farm
Lukert & Son
Hallock Brookside
Forge River
Certified Duck Farm
Smith Bros.
Stanley Chornoma
DISCHARGES (cont.)
Type and Amount
duck farm
duck farm 620 gpm
duck farm
duck farm
duck farm
duck farm 70 gpm
duck farm
Chi-Dux
duck farm &
processing plant
100 gpm
Treatment
Characteristics of Discharges
upland lagoons
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
upland lagoons
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
upland lagoons
turbid discharge -with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
upland lagoons
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
upland lagoons and
spray irrigation
upland lagoons
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
upland lagoons
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
upland lagoons	turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content and duck
slaughtering wastes
ve
c

-------
iNlXJS^RXAL & MUNICIPAL DISCHARGES (cont.)
Name
Brois,
East River
Spring Water
Ansa Pacholk
Stephen Kuczma
Oceanic
C & R
Eastport L'uck
Processing Plant
IVpe and Amount
duck farm 50 gpm
duck farm 700 gpm
duck farm 200 gpm
duck farm
duck farm
duck farm
duck farm 110 gpm
(West Farm)
duck processing
i'rea tment
upland lagoons
no treatment
no treatment
no treatment
no treatment
self-contained upland
lagoons used only in
wet years
upland lagoons
upland lagoons
Characteristics of Discharges
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content; extensive
sludge and solids discharged
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content; extensive
sludge and solids discharged
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform count
turiid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content
turbid discharge with
settleable solids and high
coliform content and duck
slaughtering wastes
vo

-------
INDUSTRIAL & MUNICIPAL DISCHARGES (cont.)
Name
Patchogue Village
Type and Amount
sewer system; muni-
cipal sewers serving
60% of the population
primary treatment
vO
ro

-------
R. D. Hennlgan
193
DUCK FARM EFFLUENT SAMPLES
The following table lists the results of analyses
of grab samples collected In August 1966 from each duck
fara in the study area. These samples were collected and
analysed by personnel of the Hew York State Departwent of
Health in accordance with the procedures set forth in
Standard Methods.
The results show that measurable settleable solids
and large amounts of colifom are discharged to the receiving
waters.

-------
TABLE 2
DUCK FARM EFFLUENT SAMPLES
Date
Settleable
Name Farm
Gallo Farm ^
Leszkowicz 2
Carman River
DiPiazzi
Borak
Jurgielewicz
Co]lected Temp: pH Solid - 1 hr0 Nitrates Coliform
Phosphates
Total
4
8/12/66 20
8/15/66 18 7 e 0
8/15/66 24 7,05
8/17/66 24 7o0
8/17/66 24 7,2
8/17/66 24 6.8
Chornoma, Paul	8/17/66 24 7o0
Roberts Swiftspring 8/17/66 24 7o2
Lukert East Farm
1	DoOc 0.7
2	DcOo 1=2
3	DaOe 0
4	BoOcDc 300
8/24/66 26 6*7
I o4
1.3
1.5
2,0
Ool
0o35
092
Oo 2
1.5
< 0.1
0,5
4o5
oa
0.1
<0,1
240,000 or
greater
240,000 or
greater
240,000 or
greater
24,000,000
or greater
24s000,000
or greater
24,000,000
or greater
4,600,000
24,000,000
or greater
15,000,000
67 = 5
90= 5
19c 0
42,5
42c0
37 3 5

-------
TABLE 2 (cont,)
Name Farm
Date
Collected
Temp.

Settleable
Solid - 1 hr0
Nitrates
Coliform
Phosphates
Total
Lukert West Farm
8/24/66
26
6.9
2.2
< 0.1
9,300,000
40.5
Smith Brothers ^
8/24/66
26
6.6
0.8
< 0.1
46,000,000
82
Vigilotta Bros. ^
8/24/66
26
6.3

9.3
46,000,000
96.0
Chi-Dux
8/24/66
26
6.6
- 0.2
<0.1
9,300,000
57.5
Adam Kanas & Son
8/24/66
26
7.2
0.2
<0.1
15,000,000
78
Breezy Acres
8/24/66
26
6.8
1.5
< 0.1
110,000,000
54
C & R East Farm
8/25/66

6.5
0.1

9,300,000
13.5
C & R West Farm
8/25/66

6.6
0.05
0.8
2,300,000
11.5
Baker #1
8/25/66

6.7
2.0
<0.1
46,000,000
34
Baker #2
8/25/66

6.7
2.0
< 0.1
4,300,000
19
Springwater 7
8/25/66

6.8
5.5
<0.1
15,000,000
32.5
Tuttle Bros.
8/25/66

6.8
0.6
< 0.1
24,000,000
33.5
Massey West
8/25/66

6.7
0.9
<0.1
15,000,000
40
Massey East
8/25/66

6.8
7.0
< 0.1
9,300,000
31.5
5	B.O.D. 162
6	B.O.D. 261
7	B.O.D. 138

-------
TABLE 2 (cont. )
Name Farm
Date
Collected Temp.
£H
Settleable
Solid - 1 hr.
Nitrates
Coliform
Phosphates
Total
Big Seatuck
8/25/66
6.5
0.9
< 0.1
24,000,000
22.5
Kostuck and Sons
8/25/66
6.8
0.1
< 0,1
9?300,000
76.5
Duck Processing Pit.
8/25/66
6.7
0.2
< 0.1
4,300,000
8.5

-------
R. D. Hennlgan
197
STREAM SAMPLES - TRIBUTARIES TO MORICHES AND
QREAT SOOTH BAYS
The following table lists the results of a review
of strean surveys conducted in August and Septeaber In the
study area.
The results of the surveys show that sludge banks
are present below all discharges and that dissolved oxygen
depletion Is a common occurrence In many areas. The presence
of sludge and dissolved oxygen less than 3 parts per nillion
for class MD" waters is a violation of Article 12, Public
Health Law, of New York State.

-------
TABLE 3

Stream Samples,
Tributaries
to Moriches Bay and Great South Bay




Long Island, New York






August 1966







Table



Stream







Index
Mileage



Bottom
Temp.

Number
Index
Date
Time
Depth
Condition
C®
DO
162-A
0.3
8/23
1:00
2 ft.
Sludge
27°
11.4
167-A
0.3
8/23
8:05 pm
2 ft.

26°
3.2
162-A
0.7
8/23
1:10
¦k
Clear 8, Clean
i—•
o
o
13.6
162-C
0.3
8/23
12:45
2 ft.

o
vD
CM
4.0
162-C
0.3
8/23
8:00 pm
2 ft.

26°
5.4
163
0.3
8/23
12:30
2 ft.
Sludge
26°
0.8
163
0.3
8/23
7:45 pm
2 ft.
Sludge
27°
0.6 *
163
1.0
8/23
1:30
¦§¦ ft.
Clear
21°
8.4
163
0.0
8/22
10:45 am
4 ft.
Clear
24°
3.0
166
0.0
8/22
11:20
1 ft.

o
lT>
CM
9.0
166
0.0
8/22
11:22
1 ft.

25°
10.0
166
0.2
8/22
11:45
£ ft.
Heavy black
24°
6.4





sludge 2 ft. deep


166
0.1
8/22
1.2:15
1 ft.
Sludge
25°
7.4
* Remarkst
Heavy Rain 1 hr. prior to sampling

-------
TABLE 3 (cont
Table
Stream
Index
Number
Mileage
Index
Date
Time

Depth
167
0.0
8/22
lit 15

3 ft.
167
0.75
8/30
3s 30

£ ft.
167
0.75
8/30
3:40

i ft.
167
0.4
8/30
4:10

3 ft.
167-1
0.1
8/22
12:45

i ft.
167-1
0.2
8/22
1:00

£ ft.
169-A
0.4
8/26
2:00

2" ft.
169-2
0.1
8/31
6:30
pm

169-2
0.1
8/31
6:35
pm
# ft.
169-2
0.0
8/31
6:25
pm
3 ft.
170
0.2
8/25
2:15

-§• ft.
170
0.2
8/25
2:39

£ ft.
Bottom	Temp.
Condition	C°	DO
		240	9.2
2 ft. heavy	28°	0.0
black sludge
2 ft. heavy
black sludge
28°	7.2
28°	15.8
1 to 2 ft.	25°	9.8
gray sludge
sludge	25°	11.8
Extensive sludge 26°	12.8
banks
Sludge	29°	3.2
Sludge	29°	10.8
		29°	10.2
More than 2	ft. 28°	9.6
of sludge
More than 2	ft. 28°	-—
of sludge

-------
TABLE 3 (cont.)
Table
Stream
Index
Number
Mileage
Index
Date
Time
Depth
Bottom
Condition
Temp.
C°
DO
174-P851-2
0.1
8/31
5:30 pm
# ft.
2 ft. heavy sludge
28°
0.0
174-P851-2
0.0
8/31
5:25
1 ft.
Heavy sludge
28°
0.0 *
174-P851
	
8/31
5:40
1 ft.
Sludge
30°
25.0 **
174-2
0.3
8/24
12:30
2 ft.
Clear
26°
1.0
174-2
0.4
8/24
1:05
1 ft.
Sludge
24°
0.0
174-2
0.5
8/24
12:40
i ft.
6 inches heavy
sludge
24°
3.2
174
0.6
8/24
1:30
3 ft.

27°
7.0
174-4
0.0
8/24
1:35
1.5 ft.
2 ft. of sludge
29°
	
174-4
0.1
8/24
1:40
i ft.
2 ft. of sludge
29°
8.2 **-
174
3.0
8/25
3:15
2 ft.
1^- ft. of sludge
	
2.0
174
3.0
8/25
3:25
"2* ft.
1-J- ft. of sludge
	
0.0
174
2.9
8/25
3:40
1 ft.
Sludge
	
2.9
* Remarks* 6 inches of floating sludge and scum present
** Remarks: Heavy algae bloom
*** Remarks: Floating black sludge at mouth of stream
ro
o

-------
TABLE 3 (cont.
Table
Stream
Index
Number
Mileage
Index
Date
Time
Depth
174
1.7
8/24
It 55
£ ft.
174
2.4
8/24
2:00
¦t ft.
174
2.3
8/24
2: 10
1 ft
177
3.5
8/31
11:10
1 ft.
177
3.3
8/31
11:15
1 ft.
177
3.1
8/31
11:30
3 ft.
177-2
0.2
8/31
10:20
1 ft.
177-2
0.4
8/31
10:30
1 ft.
177-2
0.0
8/31
10:40
2 ft.
177
1.4
8/31
10:45
4 ft.
177
3.4
8/23
2:15
3 ft.
177
3.7
8/23
2:05
1 ft.
183
2.2
8/23
2:45
i ft.
Bottom
Temp.

Condition
C°
DO
Sludge
27°
4,0
3 ft. of sludge
25°
4.0
Sludge
25°
0.0
Sludge
	
2.0

	
7.4

	
6.8
Sludge
	
0.0
Sludge
	
0.0
Sludge
	
0.0

	
1.4

24°
9.6
Clear and clean
o
CO
CM
9.8
3 inches sludge
o
CM
CM
0.2

-------
203
R. D. Hennigan
CLASSIFICATION AND STANDARDS
It is the public policy of the State of New York
to maintain reasonable standards of purity of the waters of
the State consistent with public health and public enjoyment
thereof, the propagation and protection of fish and wild-
life, including birds, mammals and other terrestrial and
aquatic life, and the industrial development of the State,
and to that end require the use of all known available and
reasonable methods to prevent and control the pollution of
the waters of the State of New York.
The statement of purposes contained in the law
reads as follows:
"It is the purpose of this article to safe-
guard the waters of the state from pollution by:
(a) preventing any new pollution, and (b)
abating pollution existing when this chapter is
enacted, under a program consistent with the
declaration of policy above-stated in the pro-
visions of this article."
Before proper authority can be exercised to abate
pollution, it is necessary to group the waters into classes
according to consideration of the best usage In the interests

-------
204
K. D. Hennigan
of the public.
The waters of the Easterly Section of Great
South Bay were officially classified on February 1, 1954,
and those of Moriches Bay were officially classified on
October 1, 1951. In adopting the classifications, due
consideration was given to hydrological features, land
usages bordering such waters or segments thereof; past,
present and potential future water usages, and the extent
of their present defilement resulting from past discharges
therein.
The "Rules and Classification and Standards of
Quality and Purity for Waters of New York State" constitutes
the general system under which all surface waters of the
State have been classified. The system establishes seven
different classes for fresh surface waters and four classes
for salt waters, based upon different usages of waters,
with appropriate standards designed to assure maintenance
of quality of waters at the level required for each class.
All four classes for salt water were applicable
to the waters of Moriches Bay and the easterly section of
Great South Bay. However, only three of the fresh water
classes were utilized in classifying the fresh waters or
tributary streams entering the bays.
The following fresh water classes were utilized:

-------
205 -209
R. D. Hennigan
Class B -
The best usages for waters of this class are
"Bathing and any other usages except as source of water
supply for drinking, culinary or food processing purposes."
The exception is stated for the reason that if the best
usage of any waters is determined to include potable water
supply usage, such waters must be placed in either Class AA
or Class A.
Class C -
The best usages for waters of this class are
"Pishing and any other usages except for bathing or as
source of water supply for drinkinK, culinary or food
processing purposes." Again, the exception is stated for
the reason that if bathing or potable water supply usage is
included as a best usage for any waters, such waters must
be placed in a higher class.
Class D -
Class D is related to agricultural or industrial
cooling or process water supply and other subordinate uses
as the best usages.
The following salt water classes were utilized:

-------
R. D. Hennigan	210
Class SA -
The best usage for waters placed in this class Is
"Shellfishing for market purposes and any other usages."
Class SB -
The best usages for waters of this class are
"Bathing and any other usages except shellfishing for market
purposes." The exception is stated for the reason that if
the best usage is determined to include shellfishing for
market purposes, such waters must be placed in Class SA.
Class SC -
The best usages for waters of this class are
"Fishing and any other usages except bathing or shellfishing
for market purposes." Again, the exception is stated for
the reason that if the best usages are determined to include
the excepted uses, the waters must be placed in a higher
class.
Class SD -
The best usages for waters of this class are any
other except those listed in the above classes.
The specific classifications for all waters in the
Moriches Bay and easterly section of Great South Bay drainage
basins are listed in Tables 4 and 5, included in this report.

-------
TABLE 4
Item Waters Index
No.	Number
r1?	Stan-
Mo. Class (jarcis
Name
187-portion
as described
187-portion
as described
7 186-portion
as described
186 - P890
9 186-portion
as described
10 185-portion
as described
11 185-portion
as described
12 185-P885 and
trib. 1
Description
Tributary of
Patchogue Bay
(Tide water
section)
Tributary of
Patchogue Bay
(Fresh water
section)
Tuthills Creek
(Tide water
section)
West Lake
Tuthills Creek
Patchogue Creek
(Tide water
section)
Patchogue Creek
(Fresh water
section)
Great Patchogue
Lake
Enters Patchogue Bay from northwest
approximately 1.0 mile northeast of
Blue Point. Mouth to 0,4 mile
above mouth.
From 0.4 mile above moth to source.
Enters Patchogue Bay from the north-
west approximately 1.5 miles north-
east of Blue Points Mouth to West
Lake (P890).
Located on 186 described as Item 7
approximately 1.0 mile above mouth.
From West Lake (P890) to source.
Enters Patchogue Bay from the north
1.7 miles northeast of Blue Point,
Mouth to Long Island Railroad
tracks (approximately 0.8 mile).
From Long Island Railroad tracks to
source excluding P885 and P889.
Located on Patchogue Creek described
as Item 10 & 11, approximately 1.3
miles above mouth.
2 SC SC
2 SC SC
B
D
2 D
2 B
B
D
2 SC SC
D
B
fV>

-------
TABLE 4 (cont, )
Item Waters Index
No. Number
Name
Description
r,
Ref. Class
No.
dards
13	185-2 and trib.
including P887
14	185-3, 4 and 5
15 185-P889
16 184a
17 184-portion
as described
18 184-P884
19	184-portion as
described & tribs.
20	183-portion
as described
Tributary of
Patchogue Creek
Tributaries of
Patchogue Creek
Canaan Lake
Tributary of
Patchogue Bay
Swan Creek
(Tide water
section)
Pond
Swan Creek
Mud Creek
Enters Patchogue Creek from the north-
west at northern end of Great
Patchogue Lake described as Item 12.
Enter Patchogue Creek from the
northeast and northwest approximately
1.2, 1.7 and 1.8 miles respectively,
north of Rt. 27.
Located on Patchogue Creek described
as Items 10 and 11 approximately 1.3
miles north of Highway Rt. 27.
Enters Patchogue Bay from the north
approximately 0.5 mile east of
Patchogue Creek described as Items
10 and 11.
Enters Patchogue Bay from north
approximately 1.0 mile south of
village of East Patchogue. Mouth
to P884 approximately 1.4 miles.
Located on Swan Creek described as
Item 17 approximately 1.4 miles
above mouth.
P884 to source
Enters Patchogue Bay from the north
approximately 0.7 miles east of Swan
Creek described as Item 17. Tide
water section.
2 C
2 D
2 B
2 B
2 D
B
2 SD SD
2 SC SC
B
2 SC SC

-------
TABLE 4 (cont. )
Item Waters Index
No. Numbers
Name
Description
Map	Stan-
Ref. Class dards
No.
21 183-portion
as described
22 183-P883
23 183-portion
as described
and tribs.
Mud Creek
(Fresh water
section)
Robinson Pond
Mud Creek
From Tide water section to P883.
Located on Mud Creek descri ed as
Item 20 approximately 1.1 miles
above mouth.
From P883 to source.
2 C
2 B
2 D
B
24 182 and trib.
25	181-portion
as described
including P881
26	181-portion
as described
including P882
27	180
28 P862
Abets Creek
Hedges Creek
(Tide water
section)
Hedges Creek
(Fresh water
section)
Howell Creek
Pond
Enters Patchogue Bay from the north
approximately 1.8 miles northwest
of Howell Point.
Enters Patchogue Bay from the north
approximately 1.1 miles west of
Howell Point. Mouth to approximately
1 mile above mouth.
From approximately 1 mile above
mouth to source.
Enters Patchogue Bay from the north
approximately 0.5 mile west of
Howell Point.
Located approximately 1 mile west
Coram Hill.
SB
SC
SB
D
SC
ro
M
U)

-------
TABLE 4 (cont. )
Item Waters Index
No. Numbers
29 GSB-portion
as described
30 BB
31 P880
32	179-portion
as described
and trib.
33	179-portion
as described
34 178-portion
as described
and tribs.
Name
Description
Map
Ref. Class
No.
Great South Bay
Bellport Bay
Pond
Tributary of
Be11port Bay
Tributary of
Bellport Bay
(Fresh water
section)
Beaverdam
Creek
That portion of Great South Bay sit-
uated southerly of a line connecting
the southernmost extremities of Howell
Point and Smith Point between lines
passing due south through Howell Point
and due south through Smith Point.
That body of tidal water located
northerly of a line between the south-
ernmost extremities of Howell Point and
Smith Point-excluding tributaries and
estuaries.
Tidal pond located 0.5 mile northeast
of Howell Point.
Enters Bellport Bay from the north
approximately 1.3 miles northeast of
Howell Point. Tide water section.
From tide water section to source.
Enters Bellport Bay from the north
approximately 0.7 mile east of the
village of Bellport. Tide water
section.
Stan-
dards
SA
SA
SA
SA
SC
SC
SC
SC
SD
SD
35 178-portion
as described
Beaverdam Creek From tide water section to source.	2D	D
(Fresh water
section)

-------
TABLE 4 (cont. )
Item Waters Index
No. Numbers
Name
Description
Map
Ret. Class
No.
Stan-
dards
36 177-portion
as described
and Trib. 1
37 177-2
38 177-3
39	177-portion as
described and
Trib. 4 includ-
ing P853, P854
and P855
40	177-P856
41	177-portion
as described
42	177-P855A
43 P863
44 P864
Carmans River
(Tide water
section)
Little Neck Run
Tributary of
Carmans River
Carmans River
(Fresh water
section)
Pond
Carmans River
Pond
Artist Lake
Pond
Enters Bellport Bay approximately 2.0
miles northwest of Smith Point. Mouth
to bridge on the Long Island Railroad
approximately 3 miles.
Enters Caimans River from the
northwest approximately 1 mile above
mouth.
Enters Caimans River from the north-
west approximately 1.3 miles above
mouth.
From approximately 3 miles above
mouth to P856
Located on Carmans River approximately
0.5 mile northwest of the village of
Yaphank.
From P856 to source
Located approximately 0.5 mile south-
east of the village of Yaphank.
Located approximately 2.0 miles west
of the Camp Upton Military Reserva-
tion.
Isolated pond located approximately
2.0 miles west of Camp Upton
Military Reservation on Route 25.
2
2
2
SC
D
B
D
C
B
SC
D
D
B
B

-------
TABLE 4 (cont. )
Item Waters Index
No.	Number
Name
Description
R»?	St
^ef- Class da
No.
45
P875
Pond
Isolated pond located approximately
1.5 miles north of Middle Country
Road and 0.3 mile west of Rocky
Point Road.
46
P875A
Pond
Isolated pond located 0.1 mile
southwest of P875 described in
Item 45.
D
47 P867 and P873
48	P865, P866,
P868
49	P869, P870,
P870A
Ponds
Ponds
Ponds
Isolated ponds located approximately
1.0 and 1.8 miles respectively north
of Coram Hill.
Located approximately 0.8, 0.9 and
1.2 miles northeast of Coram Hill.
Located in Coram.
B
B
D
50
P874
Ponds
Located approximately 3 miles north
of Coram Hill.
51 Long Island
Sound
Long Island
Sound
That part of Long Island Sound located
between a line extending due north
through the westerly limit of Miller
Place Beach which is approximately 1.5
miles west of Woodhull Landing and a
line due north passing through a point
1.1 miles west of West Landing and
extending to the N.Y. State boundary
line.
SA
SA
Any other

-------
TABLE 5
Item Waters Index
Mo® Numbers
Name
CON'T
176 d Tributary of
Narrow Bay
Description
seconds West and Latitude 40 degrees
45 minutes 32 seconds north0
Enters Narrow Bay approximately 0*25
mile north of southernmost extremity
of Smith Point.
Map
Refo Class
Noo
Stan-
dards
1.2 SC
sc
176 c John's Neck Creek
176 b Tributary of
Narrow Bay
Enters Narrow Bay approximately 0o7
mile Northeast of southernmost
extremity of Smith PointD
Enters Narrow Bay approximately
0o2 mile East of John's Neck
Creek.
SC
SC
SC
SC
176 a Tributary of
Narrow Bay
Enters Narrow Bay approximately
lo25 miles northeasterly of
southernmost extremity of Smith
Point.
SC
SC
176 Pattersquash Creek
Enters Narrow Bay approximately
0.55 mile northwest of Patter-
squash Island. The mouth of
Pattersquash Creek shall be con-
sidered to be a line constructed
perpendicular to channel axis of
Pattersquash Creek passing through
a point approximately one fourth
mile due north of Latitude line
40 degrees 45 minutes 00 seconds
as shown on reference map.
SC
SC
ru

-------
TABLE 5 (cont. )
Item Waters Index
No* Numbers
Name
Description
Map
Ref, Class
NOo
Stan-
dards
8
175 b Tributary of
Narrow Bay
Enters Narrow Bay approximately
0»75 mile east of Pattersquash
Creek
SC
SC
10
175 a Tributary of
Narrow Bay
none Other unnamed
tributaries to
Narrow Bay and
Moriches Bay
Enters Narrow Bay approximately 1.0
mile easterly of Pattersquash Creek.
All tidal salt waters which are
tributary from the north to Narrow
Bay or Moriches Bay and which are
shown on reference map but are not
specifically designated in this
tableo
SC
SC
SC
SC
11	MB-1,
MB-3,
MB-5,
MB-6
as shown on reference maps, ex-
clusive of tributaries, estuaries and
coves as described later in this
table situated northerly of Great
South Beach, Pikes Beach and West-
hampton Beach and extending from a
line passing due South through the
easternmost extremity of Forge Point
to line passing due South through
the southernmost extremity of
Potunk Point.
Moriches Bay
portions as
described
All portions of Moriches Bay except
thoses portions designated as Item
No0 12, Moriches Bay shall be con-
sidered as that body of tidal water
2,3
SA
SA

-------
Item
Noc
12
Waters Index
Numbers
Name
TABLE 5 (cont.
Description
MB-2,
MB-4
Moriches Bay-
portions as
described
13
14
175 and	Tributary of
tributaries Moriches Bay
shown on
reference map
174 portion Forge River
as described
Map	Stan-
Refo Class dards
No.o
Those portions of Moriches Bay
which are situated northerly of a
line connecting southernmost extremity
of Masbury Point with the point of
land as shown on the reference map
located approximately 0o5 mile
easterly from mouth of Terrell
River
Enters Moriches Bay approximately
0o5 mile southwest of Masbury
Point
That portion of Forge River from
mouth to a line connecting the
northerly bank of Ely Creek at its
mouth with the northerly bank of
Tributary 4a at its mouth desig-
nated as Item No<= 22. The mouth
of Forge River shall be considered
to be represented by a line per-
pendicular to channel axis of
Forge River passing through the
southernmost extremity of Masbury
Point*
SB
SB
SC
SC
SC
SC
15
174 portion Forge River
as described
That portion of Forge River
northerly of line connecting north
banks of Ely Creek and Tributary 4a
as described under Item NOc 14=,
SD
SD
ro
(—1
v£>

-------
TABLE 5 (cont. )
Item Waters Index	Map	Stan-
No. Numbers	Name	Description	Ref0 Class dards
						No0
16
17
18
174-1	Tributary of Enters Forge River from West
Forge River approximately 0o5 mile west and
slightly north of Masbury Point
174-2	Old Neck Creek From mouth upstream a distance of
portion as	1500 feeto Enter Moriches Bay
described	approximately 0o75 mile northwest
of Masbury Point.
174-2	Old Neck Creek From point 1500 feet above mouth
portion as	of Old Neck Creek to head of tide-
described	water*
SC
sc
SD
SC
SC
SD
19
20
21
174-3
174-4
portion as
described
174-4
portion as
described
Poospatuck Enters Forge River approximately
Creek	1»0 mile northwest of Masbury Point®
Ely Creek	Enters Forge River approximately
105 miles northwest of Masbury
Point«. From mouth upstream a
distance of one-fourth mile
measured along channel axiso
Ely Creek	From point one fourth mile above
mouth to head of tidewater,,
SC
SC
SD
SC
SC
SD
22
23
174-4a
P850
Tributary of
Forge River
Known as
West Pond
Enters Forge River approximately
0o5 mile north of Poospatuck Creek,
Located on Forge River immediately
north of Montauk Highway®
SC
SC

-------
TABLE 5 (cont, )
Item Waters Index
No® Numbers
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Name
Description
174 portion Forge River
as described
P851
P851-l,2
173
173-1
portion as
described
173-1
portion as
described
172
Known as East
Pond
Above P850
Tributary of Forge River located
immediately north of Montauk
Highway0
Tributaries of Enter near upper terminus of
East Pond	East Pondo
Senix Creek
West Senix
Creek
West Senix
Creek
From mouth to head of tide-
water® Enters Moriches Bay
approximately 0o55 mile north-
east of Masbury Point=
From mouth upstream a distance of
3,000 feet measured along
channel axis. Enters Senix
Creek approximately 0ol mile
above mouth of Senix Creeko
From point 3,000 feet above
mouth of West Senix Creek to
head of tidewater.
Areskand Creek Enters Moriches Bay approximately
0.6 mile easterly from Senix
Creek.
Map	Stan-
Refa Class dards
NOo
D
D
D
SC
SC
SD
SC
SC
SC
SD
SC
31
171 and
tributaries
Orchard	Enters Moriches Bay approximately
Neck Creek 0»65 mile easterly from Areskand
Creek.
SC
SC
no
ro

-------
TABLE 5 (conta )
Item Waters Index
No0	Numbers
32
33
Name
Description
170 a and
tributaries
170 or
P846 por-
tion as
described
Tributatary of Enters Moriches Bay approximately
Moriches Bay 0<,5 mile east of Orchard Neck Creek=
Terrell River From mouth upstream a distance of
1000 feeto
Map
Refo Class
No,
Stan-
dards
SD
SC
SD
SC
34
170 or P846
portion as
described
Terrell River From point 1000 feet above mouth to
head of tidewater.
SD
SD
35
36
37
170-1,2
P847
170 portion
as described
Tributaries of Enter Terrell River form east at
Terrell River points approximately 0,35 and 0^6
mile above mouth respectively,,
Pond
Tributary of Terrell River located
immediately north of Montauk
Highway®
Terrell River Above P8470
SD
B
D
SD
B
D
38
TC-1
Southerly half That portion of Tuthill Cove
of Tuthill which is situated southerly of a
Cove	line extending across and per-
pendicular to channel axis of
Tuthill Cove at point midway
between mouth of Tributary 169a,
designated as Item No. 40 and a
line connecting the two Tuthill
Points as shown on reference map.
The mouth of Tuthill Cove shall
2,3
SA
SA
ro
ro
ro

-------
TABLE 5 (cont. )
Item Waters Index
No. Number
Name
Description
Map
Ref, Class
No.
Stan-
dards
CON'T
39 TC-2
40 169a
41 HC-1
42
HC-2
portion as
described
Northerly half
of Tuthill Cove
Tributary of
Tuthill Cove
Southerly half
of Hart's Cove
Portion of
northerly half
of Hart's Cove
be considered to be represented by
a line connecting the tow Tuthill
Points as shown on reference map.
That portion of Tuthill Cove situ-
ated northerly of line extending
across and perpendicular to channel
axis of Tuthill Cove at point midway
between mouth of Tributary 169a and
line connecting the two Tuthill
Points as shown on reference maps.
Enters Tuthill Cove between
Paquetuck and Adelaid Avenues.
That portion of Hart's Cove situated
southerly of a line extending across
and perpendicular to channel axis of
Hart's Cove at a point midway between
mouth of Tributary 169 designated as
Item No. 44 and a line connecting
Haven Point and Tuthill Point across
the mouth of Hart's Cove. The mouth
of Hart's Cove shall be considered as
represented by a line connecting Haven
Point and Tuthill Point.
That portion of Hart's Cove situated
northerly of a line extending across
and perpendicular to channel axis of
Hart's Cove at a point midway between
mouth of Tributary 169 designated as
Item No. 44 and mouth of Hart's Cove.
SC
sc
2 SD
2,3 SA
SD
SA
2.3 SB
SB

-------
TABLE 5 (cont, )
^Hem Waters Index
N°•	Number
Name
Description
Map
Ref.
No.
Stan-
Class dards
OON'T
43
46
47
HC-2
portion as
described
44	169
45	169-1
168a and
tributary
SC-1
Portion of
northerly half
of Hart's Cove
Tributary of
Hart's Cove
Tributary to
tributary of
Hart's Cove.
Tributary of
Hart's Cove
Southerly half
of Seatuck Cove.
and southerly of a line constructed
0,25 mile north of and parallel to
the aforesaid described line.
That portion of Hart's Cove situated
northerly of a line 0.25 mile north
of and parallel to a line extending
across and perpendicular to channel
axis of Hart's Cove at a point midway
between mouth of Tributary 169 and
mouth of Hart's Cove.
Enters at upper terminus of Hart's
Cove.
Enters Tributary 169 approximately
0.15 mile north of mouth of 169.
Enters from east approximately 0.3
mile west of Haven Point.
That portion of Seatuck Cove situated
southerly of a line connecting the
north banks of the mouths of Tribu-
taries 168 and 165, designated as
Item Nos. 50 and 51, respectively.
The mouth of Seatuck Cove shall be
considered to be represented by a
line connecting Haven Point and the
westerly bank of Tributary 164a at
its mouth, designated as Item No. 63.
2,3 SC SC
SD
SD
SD
SA
SD
SD
SD
SA

-------
Item Waters Index
NOo Number
TABLE 5 (cont. )
Name
Description
Map	Stan-
Refo Class dards
No.
48
SC-2
Northerly half That portion of Seatuck Cove
of Seatuck situated northerly of a line
Cove	connecting the north banks of
the mouths of Tributaries 168
and 165.
SC
sc
49
50
168
portion as
described
168
portion as
described
Tributary of
Seatuck Cove
Tributary of
Seatuck Cove
From mouth to head of tidewater,
Enters Seatuck Cove from West
approximately 0.6 mile north of
Haven Point.
Above head of tidewater.
SC
SC
3,2
C(T)
51
165
Tributary of
Seatuck Cove
Enters Seatuck Cove form east
approximately 0.75 mile southerly
of East Branch.
SC
SC
52
53
167
167-1
portion as
described
Seatuck Creek
Tributary of
Seatuck Creek
Enters Seatuck Cove approximately
0.3 mile Westerly of East Branch.
Enters Seatuck Creek approximately
0.2 mile West of mouth of Seatuck
Creek. From mouth to head of
tidewater.
SD
SD
SD
SD
54
167-1
portion as
described
Tributatry of
Seatuck Creek
Above head of tidewater.
ro
ro
VJI

-------
TABLE 5 (cont.)
Item Waters Index
No • Numbers
Name
Description
Map
Ref <
NOc
Class
Stan-
dards
55
167-la,lb
Tributaries
of Seatuck
Creek
Enters from East and West approximately
0o35 and 0.5 mile, respectively above
mouth of Seatuck Creek.
SD
SD
56
57
58
59
P840b and Pond
P840C
tributary
P841a and
tributary
Pond
Pond
166 portion East Branch
as described
Tributary of Seatuck Creek located
immediately north of Montauk Highway.
Tributary of P 840b.
Tributary of P840b.
Enters Seatuck Cove at upper
terminus of Seatuck Cove*. From
mouth to head of tidewaterc
B
SD
SD
60
61
62
63
64
166 portion East Branch
as described
P839
Pond
166 portion East Branch
as described
164a
164
Tributary of
Moriches Bay
Tributary of
Moriches Bay
From head of tidewater to P839
designated as Item No0 61-
Located on East Branch north of
Long Island Railroad.
Above P839.
Enters Moriches Bay approximately
0o5 mile southeast of Tributary 165.
Enters Moriches Bay approximately
0.05 mile east of Tributary 164a.
D
SC
SD
D
SC
SD

-------
Item Waters Index
No.	Number
Name
65	163c
66	163a, 163b
67	SPC
68	163
69	P837a and
tributary
70	162c
71	162a
72	162b
Tributary of
Moriches Bay
Tributaries of
Moriches Bay
Speonk Cove
Speonk River
Pond
Tributary of
Moriches Bay.
Tributary of
Moriches Bay
Tributary of
Moriches Bay
TABL/E 5 (cont. )
Map
Description	Ref. Class ;,tan"
No,	dards
Enters Moriches Bay approximately	3 SC SC
0.25 mile east of Tributary 164.
Enter Moriches Bay approximately 0.2	3 SC SC
and 0.4 mile, respectively west of
Speonk Point.
Mouth of Speonk Cove shall be con-	3 SC SC
sidered as represented by a line con-
necting Speonk Point with westerly
bank of Tributary 162c at its mouth,
designated as Item No. 770.
Enters at upper terminus of Speonk	3
Cove.
Located on Speonk River immediately	3
north of Montauk Highway.
Enters Moriches Bay approximately	3
0.25 mile east of mouth of Speonk
River.
Enters M0riches Bay approximately	3
0.3 mile west of Apautuck Point,
Enters Moriches Bay approximately	3
0.4 mile east of Tributary 162c.
ro
ro
-o
SD	SD
B	B
SD	SD
SD	SD
SD	SD

-------
TABLE 5 (cont. )
Item Waters Index	M	„ .		 Stan-
No.	Number	Name	Description	Ref. Class 
-------
TABLE 5 (cont. )
Item Waters Index
Noo Numbers
Name
Description
Map	Stan-
Ref. Class dards
Noo
80
81
82
161 and
tributary
160a
AO portion
as defined
Tributary of
Moriches Bay
Tributary of
Moriches Bay
Enters Moriches Bay approximately
0.5 mile west of Potunk Point
Enters Moriches Bay approximately
0»1 mile northwest of Potunk Point
Atlantic Ocean Extending from shore 3 miles between
a line passing due south through
Smith Point to a line passing due
south through Potunk Pointo
SD
SC
ls2,3 SA
SD
SC
SA
ro
ro
>vO
-------
TABLE 6
CLASSIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS OF QUALITY AND PURITY
ASSIGNED TO FRESH SURFACE WATERS AND TIDAL SALT WATERS
WITHIN THE
GREAT SOUTH BAY-EASTERLY SECTION DRAINAGE BASIN
Item Waters Index
No. Number
Name
Description
*Map
Ref.
No.
Class
Stan-
dards
AO-portion as
described
Atlantic Ocean
Portion extending three miles sea-
ward from Great South Beach between
a line passing due south through
Blue Poi^t and a line passing due
south threugh Smith Point.
2 SA SA
GSB-portion as
described
Great South
Bay
That portion of Great South Bay
situated southerly of a line
connecting the southernmost end of
Blue Point with the southernmost
extremity of Howell Point and ex-
tending from a line passing due
south through Blue Point to a line
passing due south through Howell
Point.
2 SA SA
PB
Patchogue Bay
Patchogue Bay shall be considered
as that body of tidal water exclusive
of tributaries and estuaries situated
northerly of a line connecting the
southernmost extremities of Blue
Point and Howell Point.
2 SA SA
188
Tributary of
Patchogue Bay
Enters Patchogue Bay from the north-
west approximately 0.5 mile north of
Blue Point.
2 SD SD
* Refers to maps in Suffolk County Survey Series Report No. 3
-------
TABLE 7
CLASSIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS OF QUALITY AND PURITY
ASSIGNED TO FRESH SURFACE WATERS AND TIDAL SALT WATERS
WITHIN THE
MORICHES BAY DRAINAGE BASIN
*Map Stan-
Ref. Class dards
No.	
1	NB-1 Narrow Bay portion All portions of Narrow Bay	1,2 SA	SA
as described	except those portions designated
as Item No. 2. Narrow Bay shall be
considered as that body of tidal
water, as shown on the reference
maps, exclusive of tributaries and
estuaries described later in this
table situated northerly of Great
South Beach and extending from a
line passing due South through
Smith Point to a line passing due
South through the easternmost
extremity of Forge Point.
Item Waters Index
No. Numbers	Name	Description
2	NB-2 Narrow Bay portion Those portions of Narrow Bay	1,2 SB	SB
as described	situated northerly of a line
connecting the southernmost
extremity of Smith Point with point
of land shown on reference map
as approximately at Longitude 72
degrees 50 minutes 56 seconds West
and Latitude 40 degrees 44 minutes
43 seconds north; and those portions
of Narrow Bay northerly of a line
connecting aforesaid point of land,
with the point of land as shown on
reference map as approximately at
Longitude 72 degre&s, 49 minutes 6
* Refers to maps in Suffolk County Survey Series Report No. 3
-------
232
R. D. Hennigan
MR. HENNIGAN: My name is Robert D. Hennigan, and
I am Director of the Bureau of Water Resource Services for
the New York State Department of Health.
This report was prepared for presentation at the
Federal Enforcement Conference on Pollution of the Waters
of Moriches Bay and the Eastern Section of Great South Bay,
scheduled to be conducted here today.
The Department of the Interior report, "Pollution
of the Navigable Waters of Moriches Bay and Eastern
Section of Great South Bay - September, 1966," describes
generally the factors affecting water quality in the study
area which is the subject of this conference.
The purpose of this report is to augment the informa-
tion in the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
report, and to be responsive to the issues raised.
This report is only a portion of New York State's
presentation. Information and data directly relating to
shellfish sanitation, supervision and control, will be
presented separately by the State Department of Conservation.
As an aside, I would comment that Paul DeFalco's
report, I think, was as complete and factual as any report
I have ever heard, and that it would serve no purpose for
me to go ahead and try to repeat much of the information
which he has already presented to you.
-------
233
R. D. Hennigan
The reports represent Federal, State and local
cooperative efforts, since the information in them is drawn
from reports prepared by and activities carried out by
agencies at all levels of government.
This reemphaslzes the intergovernmental nature of
this particular problem, and the need for an effective
Federal-State-local partnership to assure its eventual
solution.
This report contains a summary of action to date,
and, if you will bear with me, I think some of this material
can bear repeating.
The major action to date includes the action of
Suffolk County in providing some $18,000 to do a research
program on the treatment of duck wastes.
The present efforts of the duck industry in con-
structing a 50,000-gallon-per-day secondary treatment
facility were alluded to before. It is the one that the
State Department of Health will cooperate with the local
people in, in providing a chemist and also providing some
money for the first six months of operation and maintenance.
All of the duck farmers are now under an order,
as mentioned by Dr. Ingraham.
The State of New York has assisted the county
with its comprehensive study efforts, and this was again
-------
234
R. D, Hennigan
alluded to by Mr. Dennlson.
A study of the sewage needs of the five western
towns is nearing completion. An application for a similar
study for the five eastern towns is approved and will soon
be under way.
A county-wide water supply study is under way.
Planning grants from the county currently total $1,605,000'
The county has agreed to augment this amount by $450,000
in connection with its water supply study.
A county sewer agency was formed and has moved
rapidly in the past year and a half to provide needed
collection and treatment facilities for populated areas.
A referendum on District No. 1 will be conducted
early next year.
The 1966 State Legislature enacted legislation
providing for the control of waste discharges from boats.
The legislation provides for approval of holding tanks and
treatment facilities, as well as on-shore treatment works
by the State Health Department. The actual enforcement
activity will be a responsibility of the Division of Boats
in the State Conservation Department,
In addition to the summary of action, we have
some recommendations which we would like to present to the
conferees and to the people from the Federal Government
-------
235
R. D. Hennigan
for their concern. Again, this is somewhat repetitive, but
it bears repeating.
An effort should be made to stabilize Moriches
Inlet and also to dredge estuaries to improve conditions of
tidal flushing. This is essential to obtain optimum use of
the tidal areas for recreational and commercial activities,
such as boating, fishing, swimming, and for the harvesting
of shellfish.
The second recommendation is to provide incentives
for industry to construct waste treatment facilities.
Next, to increase construction grants. The
residents of Suffolk County face tremendous costs in pro-
viding both collection and treatment facilities to serve the
five western towns.
Now, Mr. Dennison was talking about the tremendous
population growth ahead of you and the long-range program.
We certainly do not have any time to lose in this particular
area.
In addition to this, additional research on algal
nutrients and economic methods to remove these nutrients
from both municipal and industrial wastes must be accelerated,
and conclusions reached, and practical solutions proposed
that can be incorporated into ongoing pollution abatement
programs.
-------
236
R. D. Hennigan
The report further contains some information on
hydrography, the classifications and standards systems.
As you know, all these waters have been classified
by the State. A typical order issued on the duck farms in
the area and tabulations of municipal and industrial waste
discharges under present conditions, the analysis of
effluents from duck farms, and the water quality of receiving
streams, is shown by samples collected in August 1966.
All these tabulations but bear out what everybody has been
saying here today, that there is substantial pollution going
into these waters from the duck farms. At the present
time there are violations of most of the State standards in
the classified waters.
The study area is a small part of the total long
Island picture concerning water quality management and the
water resource problem. This was alluded to by Dr. Ingraham
and also by Mr. Montanari. All of ua recognize this.
However, the conference called on the study area
concerned itself fundamentally with the protection of shell-
fish through the elimination of pollution and other needed
action, and focuses on the duck farm industry.
There are three major elements to this problem.
One is the elimination of pollution and its source by
effective treatment at the duck farms and other sources of
-------
237
R. D, Hennigan
pollution in the area.
Second is dredging to remove existing sludge
banks and deposits where they adversely affect water quality
and water use.
Thirdly, the maintenance of inlets to Moriches
Bay and Great South Bay to insure desirable tidal action
and flushing.
There are other concerns in evaluating the total
water quality and the water resource management picture on
the south shore of Long Island, the main one being the
provision of adequate municipal waste collection and treat-
ment systems.
All of the duck farms have recently been put
under a new order and timetable which calls for secondary
treatment and the effective disinfection and removal of
phosphates. Research studies indicate that this can be
accomplished.
The municipal sewage treatment plants will either
be included in the proposed county district, or will proceed
uniformly to provide secondary treatment.
A schedule has been worked out with the poultry
processing plant mentioned in the Federal report, and an
order will be issued in the near future adhering to the
schedule followed with the duck farms.
-------
238
R. D. Hennigan
Removal of existing sludge banks and steps to
insure the needed tidal action in both bays needs to be
definitely spelled out in a future program of action.
Suffolk County has done much on its own to seek
solutions to existing problems. The county haa financed
and conducted an independent research study on duck waste
treatment methods, has expended county funds to maintain
inlets and waterways, and haa most recently pledged this
$450,000 in support of a comprehensive interraunicipal
public water supply study, which will give adequate attention
to water quality problems, particularly as they affect
domestic use.
The material presented in this report is intended
to facilitate the deliberation of the conferees in making
recommendations for action and for providing up-to-date
information on water quality, pollutional sources, compre-
hensive planning and enforcement of anti-pollution statutes.
Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
Are there any questions or comments?
(No response.)
MR, STEIN: If not, let me ask you this:
When you talk about 85 percent removal of suspended
solids with duck farms and biological oxygen demand and
-------
239
R. D. Hennigan
effective disinfection and removal of phosphates, how do
you think this can be accomplished? How do you expect it?
Can you expand on that? Where would the wastes be taken?
MR, HENNIGAN: The Cosulich study, which was a
research study supported by the county, came up with a
positive solution in terras of providing aerated lagoons,
and with the addition of chemical precipitation at certain
points in the process, they feel that the nutrient removal
can be effected also.
Now, the purpose of the treatment plant which is
now under construction, a 50,000-gallon-a-day plant, is to
prove out what laboratory research has indicated is possible.
MR. STEIN: The question I asked is, where are you
going to have the aerated lagoons? On each farm? Are you
going to have a collection system and take them to a central
point?
MR. HENNIGAN: That will depend on how close each
one of the farms is to each other, and also how the whole
program can be worked out.
In terms of the State grant and aid program for
construction and also for operation and maintenance, there
is some advantage to providing these treatment facilities
through some agency of local government.
If this is possible and it becomes a municipal
-------
240
R. D. Hennigan
treatment facility owned and operated by a municipality,
it will enable these people to take advantage of these
State-aided programs. If it is not done as a municipal
undertaking, I think it would be difficult to expect that
very many of the farms, unless they are the ones in very
close proximity one to the other, will get together to
provide a joint treatment works, although in some instances
— in fact, at this point I couldn't tell you whether it
would be desirable to do it on a unilateral basis on each
farm, or'whether some farms should be consolidated, or just
what would be the best solution.
MR. STEIN: Well, this leads to the next point.
MR. HENNIGAN: All right.
MR. STEIN: Because I would agree with all of
your points, but you talk about the New York State recom-
mendations, and I think I would like particularly to
address myself to Recommendations 2 and 3.
The recommendations, If you recall, were (l)
to stabilize Moriches Inlet and dredge estuaries, (2) to
provide incentives for industry, (3) increase construction
grants, and (4) research on algal nutrients and economic
methods to remove these nutrients.
I think we can agree with Nos. 1 and 4, However,
when we get to Moriches Inlet, we probably will need
-------
241
R, D. Hennigan
Congressional authorization, but I think Nos. 2 and 3
need consideration. This may be something that the State
and the industries should consider.
On this notion of providing incentives for
industry to construct waste treatment facilities, bills
like this have been introduced in the Congress since 1948.
I don't know about 1946. When I first got out of the Army,
I wasn't watching that closely, but at least since 1948
they have been introduced.
They have to be in the form of an amendment not
to our Act, but to the Internal Revenue Code.
To my knowledge, there has never been a hearing
in the House or the Senate, in either the Senate Finance
Committee or the House Ways and Means Committee. I think
there is more and more sentiment growing for this, but I
don't know that any tax measure that I remember has ever
passed without the substantive committees in the Congress
being for them.
Senator Ribicoff, who is on the Senate Finance
Committee — and this was after he was our Secretary and
very familiar with this problem, after he became Senator —
tried to get this provision through. They had a complete
revision of the Internal Revenue Code, Out of a 21-man
committee, I think he got one or two votes, but he took it
-------
R. D. Hennigan
up on the Floor in another form, and it passed. However, the
provision was dropped in conference. It never got up in the
House.
Wow, I think the answer here is clear. For what-
ever the reasons, there are many psychological barriers, it
would seem, at the present time in the Congress, for the
Federal Government to provide direct financial incentives to
industry to treat its wastes.
However, there is one thing. If a municipality
owns the waste treatment facilities—and the municipality
can be a district, county, etc.—if the public body owns it,
we can participate even tnougn they are treating industrial
wastes.
It was pointed out that we did give a grant years
ago for duck wastes, and, well, it hasn't been quite put in
effect. I do not think we have the psychological barrier in
providing Federal finances for a publicly-owned facility to
treat wastes, even though they are industrial wastes,
I hope that I am correctly expressing industry's
viewpoint when I say that it really doesn't matter to industry
who treats the waste. You don't want to own the waste
treatment facility. You are not in the waste treatment
business. If you give this to a municipality, or you
-------
243
R. D. Hennigan
put It In the municipal system, the industry no longer has
the technical nor the legal responsibility for treating the
wastes .
I am asking you to look at this because this
may require some ingenuity. That is why I raised this
question with Bob Hennigan.
It is obvious that the kind of municipal solution
presents Itself to you if you are going to pipe all this
waste to a central point and treat it centrally. However,
if you are going to have various lagoons spread around
the county and treat them in these lagoons, it is not so
obvious.
A possible way to get Federal aid is to let the
municipality or the county or a district run those, let
them be in charge and treat the wastes at these various
locations. It makes no difference to us.
However, what I am pointing out is if you are
talking in terms of Federal aid, and this may be considerable,
which I will come to in a moment, you may wish to consider
processing these industrial wastes — and duck wastes are
industrial wastes — through a municipally owned plant.
The question of increasing construction grants is
before the Congress now. As you know, we can give a grant
up to 30 percent now, and New York with its bond Issue gives
a grant. While we heard testimony before that the billion
-------
244
R. D. Hennigan
dollars wasn't enough, I have heard that same kind of
pitch, which I think is a good one, from every populated
county manager and mayor in the country — Mayor Locher
of Cleveland says the same thing, and Mayor Lindsay had the
same statement before the Senate a while ago on the amount
of money they needed. Maybe a billion dollars isn't enough,
but I must tell you that the Senate is trying to put
through a $6 billion program for the whole country, and we
have not done that yet. The House has that down to 2.4.
I think $1 billion is better than any other State in the
Union has done.
However, there is legislation before the Congress
now which might increase the Federal grant from 30 percent,
under appropriate circumstances, to 40 or 50 percent. Take
that with your State grant and you have quite a bit.
The point, though, is that the Federal grants and,
as far as I know, the State grants can only go to public
bodies. Is that correct?
MR. HENNIGAN: That is correct. Absolutely.
MR. STEIN: Now, with you in this area, and par-
ticularly your duck wastes, I think that this is a problem
of local ingenuity. If you are going to get this Federal
or State aid, or both, which I hope you do, there is one
prerequisite, and that is that the facility must be owned
-------
245
R. D. Hennlgan
by a public body.
Again, look at your map. If it is more feasible
or economical to have the plants spread around, as Bob
indicated might be the way, it is still not impossible to
have these owned by a public body. This is the determination
that you people have to make.
Money is going to be the crux of the issue, and
this may very well be a consideration worth looking into.
I have taken all this time to explain this for a
real purpose, because I think this is the approach that is
going to enable you to get Federal and State assistance in
the future.
Are there any comments?
MR. HENNIGAN: Murray, I would like to make a
comment, and that is a caution to the industry.
First of all, a State will not mandate that a
municipality take on an industrial waste problem or provide
treatment for any type of industrial wastes. That is a
local determination.
Whether or not the municipality will take on a
particular problem and want to treat it through a municipal
treatment works, is a problem that must be worked out
locally. It can't be used as an excuse not to comply with
the existing orders issued against any industry, and
-------
246
R. D. Hennigan
particularly against the duck farms.
The present discharges and the facilities from
which they originate are fundamentally the responsibility
of the owner. If local government officials or local
municipalities do not choose to work cooperatively with you
in this area, or for some reason do not want to provide the
service, then that is your problem.
MR. STEIN: Bob, I might say that the Federal
position is exactly the same on that.
In so many of these areas, we see eye to eye with
you. There is absolutely not one iota of difference between
our position and your position on this matter.
MR. METZLER: I have no questions.
MR. STEIN: Do you have any questions?
MR. KLASHMAN: No.
MR. STEIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Hennigan.
Mr. Metzler?
MR. METZLER: Mr. Edward Morette indicates that
he must leave shortly. In order that we may hear this
statement, I would like him to make his presentation now.
Mr. Morette, as you know, is President of the New
York State Conservation Council.
Mr. Morette.
-------
E. Morette
247
STATEMENT OP EDWARD MORETTE, PRESIDENT,
NEW YORK STATE CONSERVATION COUNCIL
MR. MORETTE: I had written this report out for
the Chairman and his committee because I was leaving, but
they asked me if I could stay a few minutes more and they
would give me a few minutes.
As Mr. Metzler said, I am the president of the
New York State Conservation Council. That is the organized
sportsmen in this State, and we have many members in this
room. We have over 350,000 paid memberships in this State,
and we have an organization in every county.
We were the group that helped you people to show
our support in your Fire Island battle. My predecessor was
Bob Young, who is the new Deputy Commissioner of Conservation.
Several people in this room have told me what Bob and t'he
organization did to help you get your Pire Island, so I
think that conclusively shows the vital interest that the
organized sportsmen of this State have in your problem that
you are discussing here today.
I congratulate the Chairman and his committee on
your Federal, State and local water pollution conference
to control the pollution in Great South Bay and Moriches
-------
248
E. Morette
Bay on Long Island's south shore. The New York State
Conservation Council wholeheartedly supports the control
and the elimination of all water and air pollution throughout
the entire State of New York.
Our position on pollution is very well known, and
our sportsmen's organization was the first to advocate a
complete water pollution program in our State. We whole-
heartedly supported Governor Nelson Rockefeller's $1,700,000,000
Pure Waters Program at the last State election, which came to
a very successful vote of all the people.
Our Chairman of the New York State Conservation
Council Marine District is Mr. John Binner of Long Island,
and John will submit a written statement to your committee,
which will be for the public record.
I want to assure the Federal and State governments
and the local people that if they will take in the organized
sportsmen, the members of the Izaak Walton League, the
Federated Garden Clubs, the League of Women Voters — if
they will take them into their family when they are dis-
cussing these problems, they are going to go a lot faster
and a lot quicker. I am sure that even the duck men who
are here today are going to find out that they should be
invited, because I think the duck men are going to eliminate
this problem and still raise, ducks in Long Island.
-------
249
E. Morette
I like the ducks. It is a wonderful industry
for New York State, and it is going to help a lot of people,
but, as the State and Federal men told you, you have to
eliminate their pollution.
We are not only after the duck people. I am
harassing the pulp and paper Industry in my county. I come
from the Adirondacks, and I have one of the first polluters
right in my own hometown, the largest paper company in the
world. So don't think that you are the only one that has
muddy waters. It is going to cost them at least $3 million
to eliminate the pollution in this one paper mill, but they
are going to do it. I am sure that you duck men can do it
with this engineer who talked here a little earlier, who will
solve the problem that Bob was talking about.
I think if you all cooperate, we are going to get
what we all want — clean water — and you are still going
to raise your ducks and get your clams and shellfish.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for this
opportunity.
MR. STEINt Thank you, Mr. Morette.
Are there any comments or questions?
MR. METZLER: No, I think not.
This is a very constructive statement, and after
having met with about 30 paper companies last week, I am
-------
E. Morette
delighted that you are helping us a little bit here too —
in fact, a great deal.
We have a feeling that a great many of them still
don't believe that we have a new era in New York State as
far as pollution from paper wastes is concerned.
MR. MORETTE: You put the whip to them and they
will do it. You have been babying them too long.
(Laughter.)
MR. STEIN: Thank you very much.
You know, you talk about taking you in. I guess
most of us spend most of our week-ends meeting with you
people. I don't know who is taking whom in, and certainly
we have taken you in; but I would hate to have the job of
keeping you out.
(Laughter.)
Mr. Metzler?
MR. METZLER: The last presentation from the
State of New York is one that we have been intentionally
saving for last. That is, Mr. David Wallace, who is
Director of Marine Fisheries from the New York State
Conservation Department.
MR. STEIN: Before we hear Mr. Wallace, we will
stand recessed for five minutes.
(Whereupon a recess was had.)
-------
D. H. Wallace
251
MR. STEIN: May we reconvene?
MR. METZLER: We are ready for you now, Dave.
STATEMENT OP DAVID H. WALLACE, DIRECTOR,
BUREAU OP MARINE FISHERIES, STATE OP NEW
YORK CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT
MR. WALLACE: Mr, Stein, State and Federal
conferees, ladies and gentlemen:
The shellfisheries in the bays along the south
shore of Long Island are composed of four major species,
with minor production of a few other molluscs. The
Important commercial species are the hard clam (Mercenaria
mercenarla), the oyster (Crassostrea virginica), the soft
clam (Mya arenaria), and the bay scallop (Aequipecten
irradians). The edible mussel (Mytilus edulls) and the
razor clam (Ensls dlrectus) are also taken in limited
quantities in the area covered by this proceeding, i.e.,
from the Patchogue River in Great South Bay to Shinnecock
Bay, Over the years, the ecology of the area has changed
drastically when inlets have cut through the barrier beach.
The last major change was the opening of Moriches Inlet,
with a marked transition from a brackish to a more marine
-------
252
D. H. Wallace
environment.
The growth and development of duck farms
along the tributaries in the eastern part of Great South
Bay and Moriches Bay have also had a profound effect on the
ecology of the area. These changes have modified the marine
habitat physically, chemically, and biologically. The
physical manifestations are the accumulation of heavy
sludge deposits in the creeks and coves. The chemical
changes are increased quantities of nitrates and phosphates
in the overlaying waters of the creeks and the adjacent bay
waters. High concentrations of coliform organisms and fecal
coliform organisms indicate some of the biological altera-
tions that have taken place.
The bacteriological, physical and hydrographic
conditions in the bays have been analyzed and evaluated by
this agency in two sanitary surveys, one, the sanitary
survey of Bellport Bay, which was made in 1964; and one, the
sanitary survey of Moriches Bay, which was made in 1966.
Mr. Stein, I would like to ask permission to
submit these two sanitary surveys as part of the record,
without reading them, because they are rather extensive.
MR. STEIN: They will be incorporated in the
record as exhibits, and will be available at our^Regional
Office for perusal.
-------
253
D. H. Wallace
MR. WALLACE: And I will have additional copies
for you.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
(The documents referred to will
be contained in the files of the
Department as exhibits.)
MR. WALLACE: The creeks on which the duck farms
are located are of limited acreage and probably never were
major grounds in shellfish production. All of them are
brackish and would be capable of supporting hard clams only
at or near their mouths, since the hard clams must have
salinities of 15 parts per thousand, or greater, to survive,
reproduce and grow. Bay scallops also prefer higher salini-
ties, although oysters and soft clams can live in salinities
as low as 8-10 0/00.
The normal distribution of shellfish within the
area of consideration is generally in the bays themselves —
and I would like to present, Mr. Chairman, two figures,
which are representations of the shellfish grounds generally
as they are located in the bays. I would also like to have
them incorporated as part of the record.
MR, STEIN: We will incorporate these in the
record.
I am not sure, Mr. Wallace, that we will be able
-------
254
D. H. Wallace
to reproduce these in exactly the size you have given us,
because of the folds, but we will see how they come out in
a reduced form and put them in the record.
MR. WALLACE: If it would be more helpful, we
could have them condensed into a legal size, at least.
MR. STEIN: I think if you could have this con-
densed so that we don't have a fold-up, and perhaps sub-
stitute one with a cross-hatch, without color, you could get
the charts exactly the way you wish, and we will reproduce
them.
MR. WALLACE: All right. I will do that.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
MR. WALLACE: However, this statement should not
be interpreted as indicating that the duck farm pollution
has not damaged shellfiahing.
I am also saying that in the creeks themselves,
the habitat is not necessarily too desirable for the pro-
duction of natural shellfish. Some 6,100 acres of natural
shellfish habitat are closed or restricted because of the
pollution from the duck farms (Exhibits A and B), The
shellfish in the closed areas have not been marketable for
the last 25 years because of the high coliform and fecal
colifcrrm content of the water. It is impossible to arrive
at a completely firm figure of the amount of shellfish lost
-------
254a
D. H. Wallace
to the industry over the last 20 years In these restricted
waters. However, in the adjacent waters of eastern Great
South Bay and Moriches Bay, a sustained commercial shellfish
industry has and does still exist. (Tables 1, 2, and 3).
Assuming that the production per acre of the
appropriate shellfish grounds in the closed areas would be
approximately the same as for the adjacent open areas, the
hard clam loss in 1965 would amount to 22,875 bushels,
which at a rate of $10 per bushel would mean a loss of
$228,750. Over the last five years, the total loss to the
producer probably was about one million dollars.
Losses in the other shellfish species — and I am
talking now about hard clams — are even more difficult to
assess. There are many indications that the major decline
in the soft clam population coincided with the opening of
Moriches Inlet Itself. The Seatuck Cove restricted area,
which you can see here on the chart, still has a population
of soft clams, but intensive sampling has not been done to
determine the current status of that population.
The oyster in modern times has not been an
important product in the Moriches Bay or Great South Bay
area covered in this conference. The major oyster production
has come from areas located west of the "conference area"
-------
Page Not
Available
Digitally
-------
256
D. H. Wallace
In Great South Bay. However, the effects from duck farm
pollution have been Indirect In the oyster industry and
involve excessive nutrients in the environment of the bay.
During the 1950's, oysters in the western part of Great
South Bay became unusable because of their poor condition.
Studies made by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute
personnel indicated excessive growths of certain micro-
phytoplankton triggered by the presence of high concentra-
tions of nitrates and phosphates emanating from the duck
farms. While Great South Bay has not been a good area for
collecting consistent sets of seed, it was once one of the
finest growing and fattening areas for oysters in the United
States, and possibly in the world. While the adverse
nutrient balance was corrected to a large extent by the open-
ing of Moriches Inlet, the nutrient imbalance remaining poses
a threat to future rehabilitation of the oyster industry in
Great South Bay, unless the input of these nutrients can
be halted in the immediate future.
Most of the shellfish in Great South Bay, including
oysters, hard clams and bay scallops, became very poor in
late summer and fall of 1965. Oysters were not marketable,
and scallops yielded only about two-thirds the normal
amounts of meats. Hard clams oontinued to be marketable
during that period, although the condition and appearance
-------
257
D. H. Wallace
of the meats deteriorated substantially.
The decline in the physical condition of shellfish
meats coincided again with an extensive phytoplankton bloom
of long duration, which may have been triggered by
meteorological conditions favorable for marine plant growth.
Over the last several years, Moriches Inlet
has shoaled badly and the tidal exchange of sea water has
been reduced. It is probable that the combination of high
duck farm effluents, limited water exchange through the
inlet, and ideal conditions of sunlight triggered the bloom
which in turn clogged the gills of the shellfish. Unable to
feed properly or to carry out their other essential life
processes, they proceeded to become poor and thin, and a
less desirable market product.
In fact, oysters were so poor as to be unmarketable
during the entire 1965-66 season.
Again, it is difficult to assess losses or damages
to the shellfish industry on a dollars and cents basis. In
1966, when comparable conditions have existed, no damaging
blooms of micro-phytoplankton have occurred and shellfish
have been of high quality. However, the threat of disaster
is a continuing gnawing concern to those in the oyster
business. Few oysters are being planted on leased ground
in Great South Bay. While this inaction on the part of the
-------
258
D. H. Wallace
oyster farmers Is partly due to a shortage of seed existing
generally throughout the Middle Atlantic and New England
States, most oyster planters cannot afford to risk the
potential losses from an inability to sell a product which
is undesirable.
While the shellfish industry has been damaged
seriously by pollution in the situation described here
before, hard clam production overall from New York waters
has increased steadily over the last ten years, and in
1965 reached almost 500,000 bushels,
I have a table, Mr. Chairman, showing the
progression of production in New York.
Furthermore, hard clam production in the area
covered by this conference has risen from 26,083 in 1959
to 62,413 bushels in 1965.
Mr. Chairman, I also have a table showing the
catch per year for this area.
The New York State Pollution Control Board in
the early 1950*8 took positive steps to tackle duck farm
pollution of Moriches Bay and the waters of eastern Great
South Bay by classifying these waters as SA -- i.e., suitable
for the direct harvesting of shellfish for market purposes.
Obviously, a substantial acreage does not meet the standards
of water quality as indicated by the closed area charts
-------
259
D, H. Wallace
shown in Exhibits A and B, and which are generally depicted
on the map which is behind the conferees.
So long as effluents of high solid content and
high coliform concentrations flow from the many duck farms
into the creek and thus eventually into the bay, it will
be necessary to retain the present closed areas and even
to extend them. Prom a conservation and health standpoint,
this is an intolerable condition which must not be allowed
to continue. While transplanting of hard clams has been
carried out in the Patchogue River -- and that is shown to
be the most eastern part there -- in a cooperative program
with the Town of Brookhaven, concentrations of shellfish
still exist in certain parts of the closed areas under
discussion. If clams were bootlegged by unscrupulous shell-
fishermen from these polluted areas and funneled into the
market, such shellfish would pose a serious health hazard.
An outbreak of disease from such a situation would have a
catastrophic effect upon the entire shellfish industry in
New York State, and possibly even the country. Policing
is difficult and requires the concentrated efforts of our
law enforcement personnel and the full cooperation and
participation of the Suffolk County marine police. The
obvious and direct approach to solve the problem is to remove
the source of pollution. The New York State Health
-------
260
D. H. Wallace
Department and the Water Resources Commission in the last
three years have taken positive, aggressive steps to
accomplish this purpose. Purposeful support and backing
of the State's program, both legal and financial, by the
Federal Government, will enable this abatement action to
proceed at all possible speed.
However, when the solids have been removed and
the resulting effluent chlorinated, the habitat for shell-
fish has not been restored in the creeks. Further action
beyond this point is essential. First, the accumulated
sludge, in some cases several feet thick, must be removed
from the creeks and disposed of in such a manner that the
organic load does not enter the estuarine system. Secondly,
Moriches Inlet must be permanently stabilized and kept
open in such a way as to provide maximum water exchange
between the ocean and bay waters. Thirdly, we must have
long-term planning for the multiple use of our marine
water resources so that our commercial and recreational
fisheries are in a healthy state, and at the same time
provide for appropriate other uses, such as boating and
boating facilities, swimming and other forms of marine
recreation. The location of marinas and the discharge of
sewage and waste from boats are matters of concern which
should be evaluated in such planning.
-------
261
D. H. Wallace
Each of these Items requires expenditures of
substantial sums of money to implement plans which will
carry out the necessary action programs. Joint Federal-
State and local government participation to accomplish
these purposes, along with the pollution abatement action
already initiated, should result in the fullest possible
potential shellfish and recreational utilization of eastern
Great South Bay and Moriches Bay.
We cannot urge too strongly the need for careful
planning in developing the above points. In the last two
years, several dredging projects to remove duck sludge
from creeks off Moriches and Great South Bay have been
carried out by the local agency. These have been desirable
and commendable efforts. However, limited planning and
improper disposal of the sludge have resulted in at least
one case of destruction of valuable wetlands and, in another,
of transport by currents of some of the sludge effluent
back into the bay when discharged into the ocean near an
inlet.
The entire matter of sewage sludge disposal at
sea requires immediate evaluation and control, so that we
can avoid creating in the adjacent sea the same conditions
we are attempting to correct in our inshore bays, creeks and
-------
262
D. H. Wallace
other estuaries.
SHELLFISH POTENTIAL IN MORICHES BAY AND EASTERN GREAT
SOUTH BAY
Assuming that duck farm pollution can and will
be halted, we can expect an Increase in shellfish produc-
tion by utilizing the desirable shellfish grounds in the
areas freed of contamination. Furthermore, important inshore
areas would be open and available for recreational shell-
fishing. While this use is intangible in terms of total
bushels or dollars income, recreational harvesting of clams
is of major importance in many of our areas and offers great
potential for development here.
Oyster farming may be revived in Great South Bay,
once the constant threat of an unsalable crop is removed.
Our technology for oyster culture is far advanced over that
for other marine organisms. Creation of the appropriate
habitat, which is reasonably stable, is a must before
investment of new capital can be expected from the industry.
-------
D. H. Wallace
263
Table 1. Hard Clam Production In The Eastern Part of
Great South Bay, Moriches Bay and Shinnecock Bay
By Years Prom 1959 Through 1965.
Year
Eastern
Great South Bay
Bushels
Moriches and
Shinnecock Bay
Bushels
Total
Bushels
1959
7,000
19i083
26,083
I960
6,000
20,000
26,000
1961
8,200
21,325
29,525
1962
10,000
21,000
31,000
1963
14,750
25,150
39,900
1964
30,921
15,550
46,470
1965
43,530
18,883
62,413
-------
D. H. Wallace
26k
Table 2. Hard Clam production In The State of New York
For The 10 Year Period From 1956 Through 1965,
Year	Bushels
1956	297.931
1957	298,516
1958	311,113
1959	283,933
1960	321,033
1961	357,637
1962	103,018
1963	112,586
1961	150,175
1965	195,636
* * *
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Wallace,
Are there any comments, Mr. Metzler?
MR. METZLER: I like to watch a real professional
at work, and we sure have been watching one here in the last
few minutes.
Dave, that is a mighty fine statement.
-------
265
D. H. Wallace
Again, possibly because of my Inadequate back-
ground In the shellfish business, though, I would like to
ask two or three questions.
I think in general you almost answered some of
these as we moved along. You mentioned that there can be
increased production if pollution is abated and some addi-
tional circulation is provided in Moriches Bay, but then
you went ahead to say this is pretty hard to estimate.
Can you put some sort of a dollar figure or a
quantity figure on the increased amount of shellfish avail-
able annually?
MR. WALLACE: Well, I tried to arrive at some
approximate figure for hard clams that currently exist in
the restricted areas at the present time, and I think
certainly we could assume immediately that if this collform
condition were improved, most of these shellfish would be
immediately made available.
This would result, based on what was produced -
in the open water, in a harvestable crop of about a quarter
of a million dollars immediately. This is only for hard
clams.
It is extremely difficult to pinpoint the other
species, first, because we don't have the history of an
industry on soft clams in the restricted area itself; and,
-------
266
D. H. Wallace
secondly, this subtle, Indirect effect on the oyster
business Is an extremely hard figure to tackle. I hesitate
really to try to put a dollars and cents figure on it.
That is the reason that in my statement I intended
to be very cautious, because this is extremely difficult.
MR. METZLER: Well, I appreciate your wanting to
not mislead us in this area and being cautious where it is
necessary to be.
I still am a little puzzled, though, at what
seems to me to be some discrepancy.
First, let me say that as conferee, I think we
are all agreed that pollution has to be cleaned up, but I
would not want us to lead people to expect that after it was
cleaned up, the benefits were going to be much greater than
they may turn out to be, X would rather that we would under-
state the case, rather than overstate it.
For that reason, I would like to come back, because
it seems to me like there is maybe an order of magnitude of
ten between your estimate of this value and the one that
Mr. DeFalco gave earlier, in which he said it was a two and
a half million dollar benefit. You placed it at about a
quarter of a million.
MR. WALLACE: I think the two are compatible if
we talk about the level in which we are placing this value.
-------
267
D. H. Wallace
I suspect that Mr. DeFalco was trying to place
this on the expanded value, which was used in the study of
a county in Florida, where, I believe, the total value of
the oyster industry was worth ten times what it actually
yielded in terms of returns to the man actually producing it.
This would mean that taking my figures of a quarter
of a million dollars and expanding them ten times, that is
two and a half million dollars right there. So it is
possible that this is the way Mr. DeFalco arrived at his
figures.
I believe that a figure beyond that would be very
questionable. In the first place, in the State of New York
alone, for all of our waters, we are producing this year
about 500,000 bushels of hard clams. If you take this at
an average value of $10 per bushel, that is an industry of
$5 million, I doubt very much -- in fact, I would seriously
question whether the area under consideration here would
produce to the producer a crop worth $2.5 million,
MR. METZLER: One other question then:
I am impressed with the delicacy of this situation
really, in which the concentration of sea water and the
oxygen level and the nutrients and so forth play such an
Important part.
If the organic pollution from various sources were
-------
268
D. H. Wallace
virtually eliminated and recirculation established in
Moriches Bay, you don't see any major detriment which might
occur to any part of the shellfish industry as a result of
this?
MR. WALLACE: I do want to comment on this,
because we are getting into, as you say, a very delicate
and a critical balance here between what we have and what we
might have. I am particularly concerned when I hear a
discussion talking about the possibility of the construction
of a new inlet in Great South Bay.
The reason is that over the last ten years, the
productivity of hard clams in Great South Bay has Increased
steadily every year. In fact, last year, in 1965, in Great
South Bay hard clam production reached approximately 300,000
bushels, which is more than it has been in modern times.
Any major change which would possibly change the
ecology of Great South Bay — o©rtainly 8 major inlet in
Pire Island, we will say, half-way between Moriches and
the Pire Island inlet, would change the ecology -- this
could have or might have a very serious effect on the total
ecology, and thereby actually decrease the potential pro-
ductivity of this area. So I think that here we have to
approaoh this matter with a great deal of caution and be
very certain of our basic factual material. This is the
-------
269
D. H. Wallace
reason that I have strongly emphasized this cooperative
long-term planning for the development of these multiple
resources in the bay.
MR. METZLER: One final question, then:
In connection with this, is an answer that we can
reasonably bank on possible by studies which might occur
over a period of a few months, or is this the kind of a
thing that we should go at cautiously, experimentally, and
the answer will only be known over a period of years?
MR. WALLACE: Well, I think it is almost obvious
that we cannot come up with all of the answers to the complex
complete management of this area with a short-term study.
It seems to me we make some basic studies, we
start to do some planning, and then we make further studies
to implement the planning as we progress in trying to solve
this overall problem.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Klashman?
MR. KLASHMAN: Mr. Wallace, how many acres of
shellfish area do you estimate are open now where you produce,
I think you said, 300,000 bushels?
MR. WALLACE: In Great South Bay?
MR. KLASHMAN: Yes, roughly.
MR. WALLACE: Yes. I would say about 30,000 acres.
MR. KLASHMAN: 30,000 acres, and, as I understand
-------
270
D. H. Wallace
It, you don't produce the shellfish from the whole area?
You take about half of it?
MR. WALLACE: Well, I say that shellfish have to
have a certain kind of bottom habitat in which they can
live and grow. All bottom is not usable for the growth of
shellfish.
MR. KLASHMAN; No, but of the 30,000 acres, you
figure about 10 to 20 bushels per acre. Is that it?
MR. WALLACE: Well, 30,000 acres figures out for
300,000 about 10 bushels per acre.
MR. KLASHMAN: And how many thousand acres do you
figure are closed? About 30,000?
MR. WALLACE: Well, in Great South Bay?
MR. KLASHMAN: Yes.
MR. WALLACE: Oh, no. Not nearly so.
MR. KLASHMAN: How many acres would you say?
MR. WALLACE: I would say approximately 6,000 or
7,000 acres.
MR. KLASHMAN: The figures that I understood that
the project had obtained were that there was a larger area,
as I understood it.
MR. WALLACE: Well, I am not so sure that we are
talking about the same things.
MR. KLASHMAN: I am talking about this whole study
-------
271
D. H. Wallace
area.
MR. WALLACE: You are talking about the whole
study area from Patchogue River to Shlnnecock?
MR. KLASHMAN: That Is right.
MR. WALLACE: I can give you these figures exactly,
and I would prefer to do this.
In Moriches and Bellport Bays at the present time
there are in the restricted area 6,140 acres. In the open
areas there are 8,475 acres.
Now, in arriving at my 22,500 bushels really, we
estimated that 75 percent of this 6,000 acres was usable.
The rest of it was in the creeks, where the salinity would
be such that it would not support shellfish under any
circumstances. This means that we now have 4,500 acres of
usable shellfish area.
If we multiply this by 5 bushels per acre, which
is the average production, from the 8,000 open acres over the
past 5 years, then we arrive at a figure of 22,500 bushels.
MR. KLASHMAN: I'm sorry. I am lost. Where did
the 30,000 acres come from?
MR. WALLACE: 30,000 acres is in Great South Bay.
I say, I think we got to talking about something
else. I mentioned that in Great South Bay the production
last year was about 300,000 bushels, but that is from
-------
272
D. H. Wallace
Patchogue west, which is the major producing area for shell-
fish in the world. I think there is nobody in the world
who produces more than that particular one of hard clams,
specifically. In that area there are about 30,000 acres.
I am sorry X confused you. I got to talking about
something else.
MR. STEIN: I think you might do this for the
technical session, or the executive session, and work these
figures over with your people and theirs.
MR. KLASHMAN: I thought I understood these
figures before we came in here, but I guess I don't.
MR. STEIN: This is always the case when you call
an expert. This is what happens.
As far as I know, Dave through the years has been
one of the top experts in the field.
In dealing with the magnitude of this, I think
you may be interested in knowing we have had numerous
complaints now from New Jersey. They are talking about an
extensive geographic area -- much more extensive, it seems
to me, an area than this, going from Atlantic City or the
place just north of that, Brigantine, down to Wildwood and
Cape May. The acreage they are talking about there is 5,000
acres. Now, this is, other than that, one of the more
extensive areas, so I do think in terms of the shellfish
-------
273
D. H. Wallace
Industry, you are talking about the big leagues here In the
acreage in this area.
MR. WALLACE: I did not mean to depreciate the
importance of this area.
MR. STEIN: No, This is what I was trying to
clarify and put into perspective. I would imagine that in
a closed area such as you have here, you have an extensive
shellfish-producing area, practically as large as any we have
in this country. Certainly, on the West Coast you have to
go over a much wider area of the sea coast to get the amount
of acreage that you have here. I have just mentioned the
New Jersey coast as a comparison.
I think the precise figures can be worked out, but
I think in talking about shellfish areas, we are dealing with
a major area here.
MR. WALLACE: There is one thing that partly seems
to have been puzzling here, and we might as well get right
down to the basics on this matter.
MR. STEIN: Yes.
MR. WALLACE: I am talking about the natural
reproduction and setting, without any change on the part of
man in terms of cultivation. This is quite a different figure
from what you might expect if this area were being cultivated
and Intensively farmed, where you might get, instead of 5 or
-------
274
D. H. Wallace
10 bushels per acre per year -- in an Intensively farmed
oyster ground, for example, It is entirely possible that you
could get 100 bushels per acre per year, and this is done.
However, in a natural area, where you are getting natural
reproduction and harvesting a so-called wild crop, the
average annual sustainable yield is substantially different.
MR. STEIN: That is right. I think we all understand
that.
Are there any other questions?
MR. METZLER: No.
MR. STEIN: Off the record.
(Discussion off the record. )
MR. STEIN: Thank you very much.
MR. WALLACE: Thank you.
MR. METZLER: Thank you, Mr. Wallace.
We have two county officials to be called as our
next witnesses. The first is Dr. George Leone, who is
Commissioner of Health for Suffolk County. He will make
his presentation at this time.
Dr. Leone.
-------
Dr. G. E. Leone
275
STATEMENT OF DR. GEORGE E. LEONE, COMMISSIONER,
SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
DR. LEONE: Mr. Chairman, conferees of the
State and Federal governments, ladies and gentlemen:
I too was very much impressed by Dave Wallace's
presentation in which he told us about shellfish.
I am primarily concerned for people, and I learned
a lot about shellfish, but in this problem today I come to
the conclusion that the bay men's association and the duck
industry are here today, waiting with baited breath as to
what the solutions are going to be.
Now, the Suffolk County Department of Health,
although it was established in 1928 and was the second
county health district in the State of New York, at that
time had the situation where they were discharging human
sewage into the ground in one way, and it is being done the
same way today in Suffolk County, through cesspools and
septic tanks. The major problem today in Suffolk County is
the environmental pollution.
While we are talking about the Great South Bay
and its problems with the shellfish industry, the boating
industry, recreational, and so forth, we cannot discuss this
-------
276
Dr. Q. E. Leone
without including the problem of groundwater pollution.
Today we have heard the responsibility Is fixed
on certain levels of government for the control of pollu-
tion of water, surface waters, and I, as a county health
official, am very happy to have heard this early this
morning, because in the years that I have been here the
role of the county health department -- and this should be
understood clearly -- has been one of inspection and
reporting; that the enforcement has been at other levels of
government.
In the midst of an exploding population and with
the resultant boom in building, the by-products of man's
actions are causing an unfavorable alteration of our
environment.
We have heard so much today about the huge
quantities of pollutants that are being discharged into the
Great South Bay. In addition to that, we are confronted
with the pollution of the air and of our lands, and these,
of course, are all unwanted by-products of our activities.
I don't think we have to reiterate some of the
things we heard today, but this strikes me as important,
because we at the local level have watched this, have
watched it with great frustration. The pollutants have
defiled our rivers, our lakes, our streams, and even the
-------
277
Dr. G. E. Leone
oceanfronts, so that recreation, cleanliness and happiness
of the people have been blighted.
The Suffolk County Health Department has been
gravely concerned for many, many years with the public
health hazards as they apply to people, engendered by our
current methods of sewage disposal, primarily the cesspool
and the septic tank. We have witnessed a constantly
increasing deterioration of our groundwater quality. Not
only are we concerned with the quality of the groundwater,
but with the conservation of that water as a source, and
the only source, of drinking water for our people. We have
observed a similar quality decline in the surface and
shellfish and recreational waters which surround our county.
Now, in an attempt -- and this was hard work --
in an attempt to halt the indiscriminate use of cesspools
and septic tanks, which is still going on today, the Board
of Health enacted local regulations late in 1964 that
required the installation of communal sewage treatment and
disposal systems for subdivisions of 100 homes or more.
We believe that is one of the outstanding actions
taken by the Board of Health in Suffolk County. As a
result of this, the creation of the Suffolk County Sewer
Agency was brought about by the Board of Supervisors in
1965, toward meeting the problem of pollution.
-------
278
Dr. 0. E. Leone
Now, in creating this agency, the county legis-
lative body cited the various studies, reports and recom-
mendations of the county and State health departments.
There are knowledgeable engineers in this room
today, Mr. Herbert Davids, Mr. Jack Plynn and Mr. Bob Villa,
who have been very, very close to these studies.
At least now we are charted on the right course
of action, and, albeit, it will be a long time before we
see the installation of sewer collection and disposal
systems for the five western towns, we heard thjs morning
predictions as to when construction will start.
These things still have to go to referendum,
and when I heard Mr. Stein speak on the necessity for local
action, that the Federal and State governments stand ready
to help you, there is a problem — a very difficult problem
of taxes. We are not necessarily despairing, but that action
and the timetables that were given to me this morning that
I heard are not fast enough if we are going to do what some-
body said to do this morning, and that is to stop the pollu-
tion at its source.
Now, in great fairness to the duck industry, it is
not the only polluter of the Great South Bay. Htiman pollu-
tion through the seepage of the groundwater has its contribu-
tion too, and we cannot stop that by just issuing an order.
-------
279
Dr. G. E. Leone
This will require a great participation of the people, and
the only thing that bothers me is where the money la coming
from to support the great sewers that have to be developed
for the County of Suffolk; but it should not preclude
any community of a reasonable size to start today to set up
a sewage collection treatment and disposal plant.
There is no bar against setting up these smaller
sewage treatment and disposal plants, and we have in
Suffolk County along the waters, particularly here in the
south, some of the most sophisticated communities in the
world. Yet, we are practicing the oldest way of disposing
of human sewage, through the septic tanks and the cesspools.
Of almost a million people in Suffolk County, only five
percent of them are served by adequate sewage and disposal
systems. The rest of them are discharging right into the
groundwater.
As somebody mentioned this morning -- an outstand-
ing report, by the way, by Paul DePalco — in the area of
Center Moriches they are finding many, many wells which are
already contaminated.
We are all aware of the housewife who grabbed a
glass, turned on her spigot, and got suds in her glass of
water.
I am concerned too about the pollution of the
-------
280
Dr. G. E. Leone
Great South Bay, but this cannot be resolved alone without
paying attention to the disposal of human sewage in Suffolk
County.
We are dangerously close to destroying this
irreplaceable resource — inadvertently, perhaps, but none-
theless as surely as if we sought deliberately to destroy
a resource. If we started out and wanted to destroy, we
couldn't do it any better than we are doing it now.
Water pollution is not singular to Suffolk County,
and we know that in the country, not only in New York State,
the communities are being blighted by these polluted waters.
Pollution of the environment has occurred as the Inevitable
aftermath of our increasing population and the attendant
by-products of human activity.
When they talk about increasing population in
Suffolk County, we have 10,000 babies born a year. That is
a substantial increase.
While enjoying substantial immunity from the
waters to the west, Nassau County, New York, we have not
escaped the metropolitan areas1 population pressures.
Seeking to escape the tensions of the cities — and, you know,
we have seen it together — the people have spilled over into
Suffolk County at an unbelievable rate. Since 1955, as was
mentioned several times before, the population has increased
-------
281
Dr. G. E. Leone
from 400,000 to 900,000, at an average rate of about 50,000
a year. Somebody predicted this morning that we will have
two million people by 1980.
We are keenly aware in the Health Department of
the pollution potential engendered by this skyrocketing
population. However, when demands for planning and paying
for communal need for educational facilities -- we are
building schools like mad, and we have to — for police
and fire protection and transportation, we come to the
conclusion that there is little interest or money left for
items as mundane as waste water disposal, refuse disposal,
air pollution, and the other sordid end products of our
actively expanding new communities.
Prevention of environmental pollution is then
carried out as a sacrifice. The necessary money must be
obtained from an understanding, knowledgeable, but reluctant
taxpayer, and we are confronted, I feel certain, in Suffolk
County, with one of the most profound educational programs
that we have ever had before if we are going to get county-
wide sewers.
In the absence of existing municipal waste water
disposal facilities, we have relied heavily upon the interim
devices, such as septic tanks and cesspools. With lesB
than 5 percent of the population, as I said before, served
-------
282
Dr. Q. E. Leone
by sewers, we are viewing too soon and too fast the deterio-
rating effect of these inefficient and tempoary waste dis-
posal devices upon our water resources.
Nor are we comforted when detailed research into
groundwater pollution reveals that the groundwater resources
have weak protective properties and poor recuperative powers.
Surveys and studies carried out by responsible
agencies reveal a steady increase in the water areas
unacceptable for bathing and the taking of shellfish, as we
have heard today. The blight of waters extends eastward
hand in hand with the population spread, and its attendant
pollutional end products.
There is no reason why, with intelligent planning,
this should come about, because we should stay ahead of
pollution and not behind it.
Old problems plague us too in this often-studied,
but still unresolved, duck farm pollution. The duck farm
wastes are the greatest surface water pollution problem
in Suffolk County. Its immensity is easily understood when
we are told that the discharge into Moriches Bay alone is
equal to the sewage from the City of Rochester.
I don't know how they came up with this. (Laughter.)
The waters subjected to the duck industry is
waste have become esthetlcally and bacteriologically unfit,
-------
283
Dr. G. E. Leone
affecting their use for both bathing and taking of shell-
fish. Current research suggests that even if we were to
effectively halt all waste discharges, and we are not near
that now, the amount of nutrients already present in the
bottom sediments will cause the problem to linger for many
years.
Persistent pressures for pollution control have
been exerted against the duck industry since 1949. Viewing
current conditions, we can only conclude that success, if
any, has been slight. I don't think that anyone will dis-
agree with me here.
Now, viewed from a distance, control of duck
farm wastes is a simple problem of measuring the waste,
designing, constructing and operating treatment devices.
For those polluters who fail to comply, enforcement is
seemingly straightforward.
Experience with the problem has indicated to us
that the elusiveness of its solution is a simple matter of
economics. The degree and type of treatment required
presents insurmountable economic barriers to the industry,
a large part of which is already having difficulty.
If treatment is not provided, then we must be
provided with sound, swift and effective enforcement pro-
cedures. It must be enforcement with a stomach strong
-------
284
Dr. G. E. Leone
enough to face the dissolution of an industry which is
traditional to the community. Practices acceptable in a
rural community may be intolerable in an urban community.
I must state for the record that we are not
opposed to the duck industry. We like to see it go hand in
hand with the shellfish industry. But my only concern is
that unless this timetable becomes realistic and does not
become a device for more intolerable delays, as I have
personally witnessed myself in the county, then I fear that
the solution is not close at hand.
The fact that we have not met with singular
success in the area of pollution control does not mean that
we are unmindful of our problems, or that progress is not
being made. The following measures have been adopted to
cope with the advance of pollution upon our water resources.
You have heard them all this morning.
The first is the comprehensive sewerage plan,
where the State gave us $660,000.
Next is the negotiations now for a comprehensive
sewerage plan for the five eastern towns, also sponsored
by the New York State Health Department grant.
Third is a comprehensive water supply for Suffolk
County will be carried out through a $3^0,000 grant from
the New York State Health Department. The County of Suffolk,
-------
285
Dr. G. E, Leone
the people of Suffolk, are contributing $450,000 to a
test well program to be carried out concurrently with the
comprehensive water plan.
The Suffolk County Board of Supervisors formed the
Suffolk County Sewer Agency, and this agency is currently
carrying out studies leading to this referendum that we
talked about for the two sewerage districts.
The County of Suffolk and the Duck Co-op
sponsored and completed research on treatment of duck wastes,
and we are moving forward towards the construction of a pilot
plant, as we heard today. In addition, a consultant engineer,
Mr. Cosullch, has been instructed to prepare a comprehensive
plan for the treatment of duck wastes.
There is little doubt that we have made a belated
start, and we face decades of high costs and hard work if
we wish to perpetuate the fashion of clean water to our
future residents.
Now, I am greatly encouraged today by the presence
of the Federal and State people, because by their presence
they focus attention to the problem, and by their mere
presence I think it will probably be the beginning of an
aggressive attack on the problem.
I again must state that public education is going
to be necessary, and there has been no period in which the
-------
286
Dr. G. E, Leone
public has been more psychologically determined to make
clean waters as a permanent way of American life. However,
the proof of the pudding will be when it comes time to put
up the money. The educational procedures must be intensified
and continued in order that the public may pursue their
determination in a knowledgeable fashion.
I must confess here that neither the County
Health Department nor any other departments that I know of
have been so very successful in bringing this matter to the
attention of the people that will arouse them to take certain
actions that will prevent things like this in the future.
Now, advanced technology: We have heard a lot of
experts here today, scientific experts, people who are very
knowledgeable, but with all the knowledge that they present
and they put in the record, it will be necessary for the
decision-makers, the administrators, to put this knowledge
to work in order that we can take advantage of it.
Our daily lives have been enriched with the
products provided by the activities of this advanced tech-
nology. With the advances have come new pollutional problems
in the form of exotic synthetic organics, such as detergents,
pesticides, herbicides, and insecticides. Our treatment
techniques have lagged behind the production techniques.
We must vastly expand our research into the waste
-------
287
Dr. G. E. Leone
treatment procedures, consistent with our advanced tech-
nology. Even this morning, when somebody said that we can
get the phosphates and the nitrates, it was not quite
certain that this can be done easily. This still needs
considerable testing, I suppose. This is a task, and
quite a task, which must be met by cooperative programs
between the government and industry, and it is good to see
that industry is here this morning, sitting side by side
with government at all levels, trying to seek solution.
One area that has not been mentioned is that the
educational people have responsibilities here. The schools
of engineering and science must also furnish us with tech-
nologists to design and operate advanced waste control
systems.
Enforcement: Let me say just one word, and I will
conclude.
Basic to any enforcement program is the establish-
ment of realistic and scientifically sound water quality
standards. Our current enforcement responsibilities are
spread to too many agencies, and the legal procedures are
cumbersome, complicated and slow. Maybe it will be
different after today.
Duck farms in Suffolk County have been illegally
polluting Suffolk waters for fifteen and twenty years,
-------
288
Dr. G. E. Leone
while the legal machinery — and this is what I observed —
while the legal machinery painfully clanks to an uncertain
conclusion. More enforcement powers must be delegated to
the local county agencies, who must occupy the site of the
offenses, and are subjected to the intense and immediate
pressures of the offended,
I can bear witness that not only in the pollution
problem, but with the many women's clubs and the many
complaints about the flies and odors — I learned only
within the last year that odors can become a public health
nuisance, and if anybody doesn't believe that, you can be
taken to court for it. We have had that shown to us very
clearly, that odors can become public nuisances, and the
courts will find for the people who are complaining.
Now, money. I think the last thing is money.
After we heard Paul DePalco's presentation this
morning, I mentioned to my engineer that I think we could
all go home if the Federal and the State people came up
with the money. That is all we need. But it is not that
easy, I am quite sure.
I know that clean water will cost us money.
Dirty water will cost us more, muoh more than we can possibly
afford. The current sources of Federal and State grants
and community funds are necessary. Increased grant moneys
-------
289
Dr. G. E. Leone
must be provided for those communities unable to meet
their commitments.
I want to close with one observation.
First, and I think the courts have decided this
recently up around Erie County, no one has a right to
pollute. No one has a right to pollute. Notwithstanding
the delinquency probably of an agency who gave somebody
permission to discharge polluted effluent into the waters,
notwithstanding that, the court ruled no one has a right to
pollute.
This was a refreshing decision that I hope will
be taken to the heart of anyone who feels that by some legal
way he has a right to pollute.
The County of Suffolk has made great strides, as
has been said here today. I think the only trouble with
those of us who have been close to it is that we have become
impatient. We feel the burden; we feel the frustrations;
we have become despairing as to whether anyone is going to
do anything about it, and I hope that out of this conference
will come some guiding influence, some coordinated effort.
I hate the word "coordinated" always, because after you
add that word, somebody says you create a new job for
somebody, but there needs to be coordination in Suffolk
County on this problem.
-------
290
Dr. 0. E. Leone
I have attended many, many meetings, and every
time you attend a meeting you walk out of that meeting with
the idea of frustration that, "I wonder if anything is
going to come out of it." I know I see some people around
here who have attended some of these meetings with me, but
I think the time has come, with the help of the highest
level of government and with the help of the most powerful
level of government, the people, where I think you ought to
be able to lick this to the advantage of the shellfish
industry, the duck industry, and the people of Suffolk
County.
Thank you very much,
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Dr. Leone, for a very
forceful and comprehensive statement.
Before I turn this over to questions and comments,
I might indicate that while we appreciate being here to
focus public attention on this, I should call attention to
the fact that this is a Federal enforcement case, and the
State has issued an order.
I think those of you through the country who have
watched, for the past twenty years, Dwight Metzler and Bob
Hennigan and Klashman and myself, and know how we operate,
know that we just don't come to focus public attention,
though that is part of our duty. We are here to have clean
-------
291
Dr. G, E. Leone
water.
The State has started its mechanism. This is the
first stage in the Federal enforcement mechanism. We move
inexorably. We have with Dwight in the past, when he had
been in Kansas, moved with him, side by side, in cleaning
up pollution problems. We expect to do this here. Any time
the State wants to call on us, we are ready.
Now, don't expect us to go home and think you have
just had another meeting, because again I want to call your
attention to the fact that this is the first stage in a
Federal enforcement case, called by a Cabinet Officer.
The Congress did not do that lightly. They did not
want anyone else to have the power to call one of these
conferences except a United States Cabinet Officer, and he
did it in this case, and we are on our way.
Mr. Metzler?
MR. METZLER: You were talking to the point that
I was interested in, and I would like to ask Dr. Leone
whether he still thinks the legal procedures are complicated
and slow, and at what level of government he would talk
about they may have been in the past; but X would want
to give the impression that I believe at both the State
and the Federal levels, we have been on the move.
Let me give you a quick example in New York State
-------
292
Dr. G. E. Leone
that is relatively fresh in my mind. In one of the State's
largest cities, within a period of about a week, their
attorneys advised a rather rambunctious city council that
they probably had no choice but to comply with an order,
and that city, I might say, has now enthusiastically adopted
— and this happened just within the last few weeks — a
complete about-face concerning its pollution problems. It
is like a new convert in church. They are among the most
enthusiastic now.
So, if you have the feeling, Dr. Leone, that this
is now true, still true, then I would like some particulars,
so that I can either be better informed, or so that I can
change your opinion.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Klashman?
MR. KLASHMAN: I have no comments.
MR. STEIN: You know, in order to get possibly
another convert, you don't mind if I give another example?
We had one of these conferences in another part
of New York State. At that conference it developed that
one community had been under orders for quite a while.
They had the same kind of dismal litany that we had here.
This community has been under orders since 1908 from New
York State. They thought the same thing was going to happen,
that the Attorney General of New York State — we turn this
-------
293
Dr. G. E. Leone
over to the State after we leave, because this really Is
a State and local matter — we try to help; but they
thought that the Attorney General of the State would forget
It.
When we left the Attorney General put four lawyers
on the case. The man personally came up and served the city
with the order. The order Is in effect. They have hired
engineers, and, as far as I know, they have complied.
In other words, I think we are moving. I think
the State of New York is moving. I say this because I
think we have very close Federal-State cooperation, and we
have the advantage of having people who have worked together
for years, who know each other and respect each other and
can move forward, and I think we are going to get action.
Let me just say this for all the polluters and
all the people here. As far as New York State and we are
concerned, we don't have to deal with the slow grinding
bureaucracy of sending memos and approvals. One word on
the telephone from Dwight Metzler to us and a word from us
in agreement, and we have the agreement and the papers
follow later. We just follow through, and this is what
we intend to do here.
MR. METZLER: I just want to thank Dr. Leone
for that statement.
-------
Dr. G. E. Leone
294
Do you want to respond, Dr. Leone?
DR. LEONE: No. I am aware of that village
upstate, because I lived there, and I am very much aware that
in 1908 the Department of Health cited them' and charged them
$50 a day, but the sovereign State of New York, until 1966,
still were not able to stop that village from polluting
the waters of Lake Erie.
MR. METZLER: May I say that I think you can
all see now why Suffolk County has one of the really out-
standing health departments in the State? It is also
independent and stands on its own feet very well. With
this kind of leadership, we expect to see some more great
things out here.
We have one other county official. Is Mr.
Kammerer here, the Commissioner of the Suffolk County
Department of Public Works?
(No response.)
MR. METZLER: I see a shaking of heads. All right.
There are two more witnesses that I promised for
sure to get on this afternoon, and at that point I would
propose to read over the witness list and see if there are
any others on the list who cannot come back and start with us
tomorrow morning.
Is that agreeable with you, Mr. Chairman?
-------
A. Stout, Jr.
MR, STEIN: Yes. If we proceed, we probably are
going to have to give the reporter a slight rest after
your next two witnesses.
MR. METZLER: I would certainly agree to that.
Our next witness is Mr. Stout.
Mr. Stout, I am sorry, I do not have your first
name. Would you give your name and your association for
the record, please?
STATEMENT OP AUGUST STOUT, JR., CHAIRMAN,
MORICHES INLET STABILIZATION COMMITTEE
MR, STOUTi Thank you.
My name is August Stout, Jr., Chairman of the
Moriches Inlet Stabilization Committee.
Mr. Chairman, Federal and State conferees:
I would like to thank you for your interest in our
area down here.
Our organization consists of approximately 30
civic organizations that have been dedicated to the sole
purpose of stabilizing and maintaining Moriches Inlet.
In listening to the various speakers today, I was
surprised that so many people referred to Moriches Inlet and
what it can do, what it should do for our polluted waterways
here in Moriches Bay and Great South Bay; but I sure don't
-------
296
A. Stout, Jr.
know where these people were or are before the Appropriations
Committee in Washington or the Bureau of the Budget in
Washington. I hope that these minutes of this proceeding
will be available to the Federal level, the Bureau of the
Budget. They keep taking the item out to stabilize the
inlet, and the Appropriations Committee does not see fit to
add too much to this project that we have been interested in
for as far back as 19^5.
This emphasis on Moriches Inlet is based on the
fact that the flushing action, the stabilizing of the inlet,
would accomplish one of the principal means of cleansing and
ridding the bay of pollution.
As for pollution of Moriches and Great South Bays,
it is my opinion that too much emphasis has been placed on
the duck farms as a source of bay pollution.
I feel that there are other sources, increasing
sources of pollution that are worthy of your committee's
serious consideration. These other sources that merit your
investigation Include the vast development of real estate
along our hundreds of miles of shore front, which includes
the bays, the creeks and the rivers, with cesspools which
do not adequately serve their purpose; and the increase in
pleasure boating and the lack of control over sanitary
facilities of these crafts; and the draining of street water
-------
297
A. Stout, Jr.
runoff Into our bays, rivers and creeks from town, county
and State highways.
As for the Moriches Inlet, there is one bright
spot on the horizon, according to the word received this
past week from Congressman Otis G. Pike, that the Appropria-
tions Committee in Washington earmarked $100,000 which has
been requested by the Army Engineers to get this project
off the ground.
We of the Moriches Inlet Stabilization Committee
are very happy and enthused that somebody is trying to get
the project off the ground, because we know of its Importance
over the years, going back to 19^5* when we tried to appear
before Army Engineer hearings to get an appropriation even
to look at Moriches and Shinnecock Inlets; later on to get
the approval of the Congress and the Senate; and, finally,
In I960, to have the bill approved by President Eisenhower
as an approved project. However, of course, we have had
the problem -- and many of our public officials in
Washington have had this problem -- of having this project
funded.
Once again, I say that these minutes of this
meeting, I hope, will be available to them, so that they can
back them up on getting the project off the ground.
Our committee, the Moriches Inlet Stabilization
-------
298
A. Stout, Jr.
Committee, realizes Uncle Sam has a tremendous equity in
both these bays in the establishing of the Pire Island
National Seashore, and we hope that your committee's work
will be the answer to protecting this investment, rather
than letting the National Seashore become a public pumping
ground via our bays.
Thank you very much, sir.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
Are there any comments or questions?
MR. METZLER: I am interested, sir, in your
experience with getting some assistance on this.
I am a little dismayed at the twenty years that
you indicate it has taken to get just through a Corps of
Engineers study.
Would you like to give me a little further
information about this point?
MR. STOUT: Maybe I didn't make myself clear.
The project was started back in 19^5 with requests
to the Federal Government for an appropriation to survey
Moriches Inlet, and it took from 1945 until i960, in the
Rivers and Harbors Act, when it was approved.
We have engineered and re-engineered this inlet
a thousand times. For the money that has been spent on
engineering, we could have had it stabilized.
-------
299
A. Stout, Jr.
Our State, county and town have put in over
$3 million into this project. Since it has been an approved
project and has not been funded, the Army Engineers have
included it in their various budgets over the years — and
I say over the years, since i960. It always seems to be
taken out of the Army Engineers' budget, the District Army
Engineers' budget, if I have that correct, through the
Bureau of the Budget. They have something to do it. I am
not too clear on that part, I get mixed up in Washington,
sir, but they seem to take it out because we have need for
money some place else.
However, one of the things that our committee
has been working on for all these years is the fact that
this has a vital reaction in this whole area of flushing out
our bays. I don't think anybody is going to question that,
and yet we can't convince Uncle Sam in Washington how
important it is.
We have been there many times. I have personally
been before the Appropriations Committee and the Public
Works Committee, and this is where it stands.
I have tried to clear up the question. We have
not been twenty years getting the money. It is actually six
years, and they tell me the average project takes ten years
to be funded.
-------
300
A. Stout, Jr.
Now, that Is all I know.
MR. METZLER: Mr. Chairman, may we continue this
discussion off the record?
MR. STEIN: Surely.
MR. METZLER: Not because what I am saying has any
need to be off the record.
MR. STEIN: Surely.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. STEIN: All right. Let's get back on the record.
MR. STOUT: Thank you very much for your help.
MR. METZLER: We would be glad to work with you,
Mr, Stout, in any way that we can on this. I am sorry we
have taken this much of your time.
MR. STOUT: We appreciate the free advice. I can
tell you that. Our committee will be very happy, because
we have lived with it for a long time, as you can see.
That is the whole story.
MR. METZLER: Before calling the next witness for
New York State, would you permit me to read the names of
the witness list that I have so far. Will any of you make
known now if you are unable to return tomorrow morning,
probably about nine o'clock, it looks like.
MR. STEIN: All right.
MR. METZLER: Mrs. James Sherard, can you come back?
-------
MRS. SHERARD: Yes.
MR. METZLER: Hugh Mercer, of the Bluepoint
Company?
MR, MERCER: I shall return tomorrow morning.
MR. METZLER: Thank you, sir.
Maurice Barbash, Chairman of the Citizens'
Committee?
MR. BARBASH: Tomorrow.
MR. METZLER: Edwin Furman, President of the
Southampton Town Baymen's Association, Inc.?
MR. FURMAN: I will come back.
MR. METZLER: Emanuel Licht, Feather Marketing
Cooperative Association?
MR. LIGHT: Tomorrow morning.
MR. METZLER: Dr. Vanderborgh of the Oyster
Institute of North America?
DR. VANDERBORGH: I can be back tomorrow.
MR. METZLER: Thank you, sir.
Adrian Hoek of the Great South Bay Baymen's
Association?
MR, HOEK: I will return tomorrow.
MR, METZLER: Thank you, sir.
Nelson Houck, General Manager of the Long Island
Duck Farmers Cooperative, Inc.?
A VOICE: He will be here.
-------
E. M. Wallace
302
MR, METZLER: He will be here tomorrow?
A VOICE: Yes.
MR. METZLER: Well, then that brings us, Mr.
Chairman, to what perhaps might be our last witness for
today.
Are there any of you who wanted to speak who have
not given me their name, who would want to speak this
afternoon?
(No response.)
MR. METZLER: Well, let's finish with our last
witness, and in many ways it is very appropriate.
Mrs. Wallace, Executive Director of the Oyster
Institute of North America.
STATEMENT OP MRS. ELIZABETH M. WALLACE,
DIRECTOR, OYSTER INSTITUTE OP NORTH AMERICA
MRS. WALLACE: Chairman Stein, honorable conferees,
ladies and gentlemen:
I am Elizabeth Wallace, Director of the Oyster
Institute of North America, and, as such, represent the
molluscan industry of three species of oysters and three
species of clams of our nation.
This first Federal Water Pollution Control
-------
303
E. M. Wallace
Enforcement Conference in relation to shellfish makes P.L.
234 a reality to the molluscan industry. This conference
became a goal for every shellfisherman in our nation as a
result of the molluscan hearings of October 2nd and 3rd,
1963, before the House Subcommittee on Fisheries and Wild-
life Conservation.
The damage of the duck farm pollution to the bay-
men and shellfish farmers of New York has been recognized
for at least fifteen years. However, as testimony after
testimony in the 1963 hearings pinpointed pollution as the
major factor in the ever-dwindling production of oysters and
clams in our nation, it became clear to everyone that the
abatement and control of domestic and industrial pollutants
is imperative.
Not to be reproduced, but for the record, here is
a transcript of those hearings.
MR. STEIN: Thank you. That will be made an
exhibit at this point. Since this is a public document, it
will be available in all our offices for inspection.
MRS. WALLACE.- Thank you, Mr. Stein.
MR. STEIN: As a matter of fact, copies of this
can be made available on request.
MRS. WALLACE: That's right.
-------
304
E. M. Wallace
(The document referred to will be
contained in the files of the
Department as an exhibit.)
MRS. WALLACE: Our plight recently coincided with
a national grass roots concern as citizens began to fight
for their heritage — clean water. The great drought in
the East underscored the need and forced all of us to become
aware of the ominous dearth of potable water. In a sense,
the production and marketability of shellfish became an
indicator of acceptable water quality. Under the leadership
and skills of Edmund S. Muskie of Maine in the Senate and
Representative John Blatnik in the House, the Federal Water
Quality Act of 1965 was enacted. Those of you who are now
responsible for reclaiming our waterways and estuaries have
our unqualified support and encouragement, and a mandate
from the Nation.
While the area of 6,100 acres under consideration
at this conference is small in comparison to the two million
acres of shellfish grounds that are either closed or inactive,
duck farm pollution is a highly sensitive issue and critical
to the welfare of the shellfisheries in New York. Attention
focused on this issue will be precedent-setting to other
polluters.
The Survey Report of 1966 for Moriches Bay made
-------
305
E. M. Wallace
by the New York Conservation Department is an excellent
current analysis of the area we are considering. However,
each evaluation of the water quality of Forge River, Harts
Cove, Seatuck Cove and Tuthill Cove concludes dismally,
"Date collected indicates the entire (specified) area
should remain closed for the taking of shellfish for market
purposes."
We could present a MacNamara-type accounting of
the losses represented by duck pollution, if that were
necessary — and for every other blighted shellfish-producing
area in the 21 marine States. However, a far greater justi-
fication is apparent and inescapable. To destroy an environ-
ment is wrong. To deprive citizens of their basic rights is
wrong. There is no other alternative but to restore the
environment to its multiple beneficial uses.
While it may seem naive to challenge an industrial
giant to be responsible for detrimental effluents, it has
proved more difficult to confront a smaller industry. A
national corporation must maintain a good image.
For twenty years the duck farmers have frustrated
New York's local and State officials by taking advantage of
the inadequacies in the New York law. At hearings held in
the County Center at Riverhead, spokesmen for the duck
-------
.306
E. M. Wallace
industry successfully pleaded ignorance and/or poverty as
reasons for disregarding the sanitary regulations. One
farmer at one hearing -- and I sat through a number of them
-- who threw himself on the mercy of the hearing officer
because he could manage neither the waste disposal problems
nor the actions of his employees, inadvertently referred to
his ^40-foot yacht in its ability to navigate the sludge
deposits of Forge River, Later in the same week this same
person was named by Newsday as the recipient of an award
from Cornell University for his outstanding formula of the
exact food intake needed for the total life of each individu-
al duck.
On September 5th, among the compilation of
Presidential documents, was the interdepartmental agreement
concerning consultation between the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare and the Department of the Interior on
the health aspects of water pollution control. We submit
this also as part of our testimony to document the need
for specific water quality standards to guarantee the
acceptance of our shellfish products.
MR. STEINj This will be submitted as part of the
record. This is also a public document available for
inspection and is available on request.
-------
307
E. M. Wallace
(The document referred to will be
contained In the files of the
Department as an exhibit.)
MRS. WALLACE: We also wish to submit the National
Shellfish Register of 1966 to document the need and the
scope for future shellfish conferences.
Perhaps just the specific pages of the total can
be incorporated, Mr. Stein.
MR. STEIN: We can include this in the record.
This is not that long. This will appear in the record, as
if read, without objection.
MRS. WALLACE: Thank you.
(The document referred to is as follows:)
NATIONAL REGISTER OP SHELLFISH PRODUCTION AREAS
LEROY S. HOUSER AND PRANK J. SILVA
U.S. PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
1798
U. S. DEPARTMENT OP HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
-------
308
E. M. Wallace
Division of Environmental Engineering and
Food Production
Shellfish Sanitation Branch
1966
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 20402 - Price 15 cents
FOREWORD
The National Shellfish Sanitation Program is a
cooperative State-Federal-Industry effort designed to (l)
assure to the consuming public the safety of shellfish
(oysters, clams, and mussels) shipped in interstate commerce
and (2) provide for continuing use of a valuable natural
resource. The Program is concerned with the sanitary aspects
of shellfish production, harvesting, processing, and distribu-
tion. In recent years it has become increasingly evident
that there is a need for reliable statistics on the size,
sanitary classification, and location of the Nation's shell-
fish growing areas. The absence of such data makes program
planning and administration difficult and has obscured
trends in area availability and sanitary classification.
-------
309
E. M. Wallace
The information contained in this brief tabulation
could not have been gathered without the wholehearted
cooperation of State health and conservation agencies who
gave so freely of staff time in collecting the information
presented. We specifically acknowledge the cooperation of
these agencies in gathering the Information presented in
the following pages.
Eugene T. Jensen, Chief
Shellfish Sanitation Branch
Division of Environmental Engineering
and Pood Protection
Public Health Service
DEFINITIONS
INTERSTATE AREAS	- Waters receiving run-off from an
interstate (or international)
watershed
INTRASTATE AREAS	- Waters not receiving run-off from
an interstate watershed (or inter-
national).
ACTIVE AREAS	- Waters currently growing shellfish.
-------
310
E. M. Wallace
INACTIVE AREAS	- Waters not currently growing shellfish
but which are biologically capable of
producing shellfish.
AREAS FULLY APPROVED -Waters which have been approved by the
State control agencies for growing and/
or harvesting of shellfish for direct
marketing.
AREAS CONDITIONALLY
APPROVED	- Waters approved by the State control
agencies for growing and/or harvesting
of shellfish; approval being contingent
upon the attainment of an established
performance standard by sewage treat-
ment works discharging effluent, directly
or indirectly, to the area.
CLOSED AREAS	- Waters prohibited by the State control
agencies for harvesting of shellfish.
NATIONAL REGISTER OP SHELLFISH PRODUCTION AREAS
The Hbuse of Representatives Subcommittee on
Fisheries and Wildlife Conservation of the Committee on
-------
311
E. M. Wallace
Merchant Marine and Fisheries held hearings on Molluscan
Shellfish on October 2 and 3» 1963> at which time the
problems of the shellfish industry were discussed at some
length. One of the points brought out during these hearings
was that there were no figures readily available on a
national basis as to the acreages of shellfish growing areas
classified as approved, conditionally approved, or closed.
In a subsequent report to the Subcommittee, the
Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
noted that administration of the National Shellfish Sanita-
tion Program had been hindered by incomplete information on
the extent of shellfish production areas; the extent of areas
lost to shellfish production due to pollution or toxicity;
and on quality trends in areas available for harvesting or
culture. The report also pointed out that if a national
effort was to be made to preserve the shellfish industry, it
would be necessary that the present program be expanded to
provide this information on a continuing basis. The report
indicated that this deficiency would be corrected through
establishment of a National Register of Shellfish Production
Areas.
As a result of the Molluscan Hearings and the
subsequent report of the Secretary of the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, the Shellfish Sanitation
-------
312
E. M. Wallace
Branch in the latter part of 1963 solicited the individual
coastal States, through the Public Health Service regional
offices, for available information as to the number and size
of areas classified by the States as fully approved, condi-
tionally approved, or closed. This information was published
as a single table in September 1964, under the title
"National Register of Shellfish Production Areas" and was
distributed to interested persons and agencies.
Tables I-VI represent data available through April
30, 1966, from all coastal States, exclusive of Hawaii,
Alaska, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and the Trust
Territories. The data covers the following points by State
and by Region; number, size and classification of areas;
location of areas by interstate and intrastate waters, and
by active and inactive areas. Definitions of the various
terms used in the tables are given on page iii.
Periodic revisions are planned to provide a
constant inventory of shellfish production areas as an aid
in determining gain or loss of areas through progress in
water quality management. In addition, it is expected that
the system will be expanded and refined to provide (l)
information on levels of sanitary quality which prevail in
these areas and (2) information on factors which determine
water quality.
-------
313
E. M. Wallace
The acreages given in the Tables have been
rounded to the nearest 100 acres, where appropriate. Acreage
data reflects water masses and does not presume uniform
distribution or magnitude of shellfish resources in such
areas.
-------
National Register of Shellfish Growing Areas
Table I
Interstate Active Areas
1 1
1
!


Approved

Tota 1 No.- J




J

Fully

Conditionally
Approved
Closed

Tota 1

Reqion
State
Acres j
Areas !
Acres
Areas
Acres
Areas
Acres
Areas
Acres
Areas
! 1
Mat ne
0 i
1
1
0 1
0 :
0
0
)
0
2.500
6
2.50C
6

New Hamosh i re
0 ;
0 1
0
G
0
0 '

_
	
-

Massachusetts
500 i
1:
3.000 .
2
3.500
3
2.000 |
3
5.500
6
1
Rhode Island
60.900
i :
n .600
6
72.500
7
13.900
20
91 .400
27
I
»
Connecticut
100
i 1
1.300
I
1.400
2
6.400
4
7.800
6
i
i
Total
61.500
3
15.90C
9
77.400
12
29.800
33
107.200
hS

H
Hew York
13.500
1
0
C
13.500
I
24.500
2
3".COO
3

New Jersey
; 416.000
1 .
3.000
1
419.000
2
28.000
1
£
O
O
o
3
i
Delaware
! 9*1.900
1
0
0
194.900
1
1.100-
1
196.000
2
i
Total
, 624.400 •
3
3.000
1
627.400
4
53.600
4
681.000
O
i
! Ill
Maryland
803.000 .
6
0
0
803.000
6
17.900
5
325.900
) !
r
VIrqinia
822,600 i
3
0
0
822.600
3
3.400
3
326.000
6
5
North Carolina
927.700 i
5
0
0
927.700
5
45^00
5
972.900
)0
¦
Total
2.558.300
14
0
0
2.558.300
14
66.500
13
2.624.800
27
•
IV
South Carolina
1,000
1
0
0
1,000
1
17.500
3
18.500
4

Georqia
0
0
0
0
0
0
7.000
1
7.000
1

Florida
188.500
5
0
0
i ISC.500
5
87.000
5
275.000
10

Alabama
1^7.500
3
0 ,
0
147.500
3
255.500
3
403.000
6

Mississipp i
3.500
1
0 >
0
3.500
1
0
0
3.500
1

Total
3^0,500 •
10!
0 '
0
340.500
10
367.000
12
707.500
22



VII
Lou i s i ana
51 ,^00 ;
i:
G :
0
51.^00
1
0
C
51.400
1

Texas
0 :
0
0 i
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
'
Total
5?,4oc i
i1
c!
0
51.400
?!
0
o
51 .'~oo
!
!
¦ 1 ¦" ¦ 1 	





1 ix
Csli fornie
r, J
o
u
K?
0
r, ¦
X. :
c
'
r\
f;
1
Oregon
0 >
f-
€
r
n
/¦", i
0
{'
V.
p
i
Vasbinqtoti
1 u '
0'
2CC
1
21C
? ;
e
¦j
2U
]

Total
i 0 ,
0
20 C
1
2CK
! !
c
c
20C
]
jlH'ITEO ST/
TES TOTALS

31!
IDJC'C ;
n
3,^55,200

r i .<
P » - ' ' * r
52
' . '72.100
1 oh
-------
National Register of Shellfish Growing Areas
Table It
	Intrastate Active Areas	
»

Approved
Fully Conditionally
Total No.
Approved
i
!
Closed

Tota'

|Req ion
State
Acres
Areas
Acres
] Areas
Acres
Areas
|Acres
Areas
Acres
Areas
1
!
i i
Ma: ne
291.600
96
0
0
291.600
96
50.000
9o
-
349.600
192
»
New Hampshire
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
Massachusetts
24.600
33
3,100
16
o
o
rv
CM
49
?.9nc
41
33.600
90

Rhode Island
3,900
k
200
i
4. i or
5
800
4
4.900
q
\
Connect i cut
47.000
16
0
0
47.000
16
8.100
7
55.100
23

Total
367.100
149
3.300
17
370.400
166
7 2.800
14H
443,200
314
" ' 	 — 1
i
II
New York
390.200
57
0
0
390.200
57
120.900
29
511.100
86
i
New Jersey
27.000
27
1,100
1
28.100
28
29.000
63
57.100
91
i
Delaware
14.000
2
0
0
14.800
2
2.300
10
17.100
12
;
Total
432.000
86
1 .100
1
433.100
87
152.200
102
535,100
189

< in
Maryland
314.400
17
0
0
314.400
17
57.300
17
371.700
34

Vi rqinia
530.000
8
1.100
1
531.100
9
54.800
8
585.900
17
i
North Carolina
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

Total
844.400
25
1.100
1
845.500
26
112.100
25
957.600
51



IV
South Carolina
132.500
14
1C0
1
132.600
15
32.000
3
164
18 :

Georq ia
97.300
8
0
! r,
97,300
8
36.400
8
133.700
16

F1orida
4IB.100
i 21
0
0
418.100
21
555.600
28
973.700
49

Alabama
0
C
700
! 1
700
0
1 .200
4
1.900
5

Mississipoi
1 23.000
3
•8.500
i '
31.500
4
87.300
4
'' 3 £00
8
I
Total
! 670,900
46
9,300
! 3
680.200
48
712,500
47
1.392.700
96
: I ! ! !
VII
Lou i s iana
92^.000
; 7
28,600
j 1
953.600
-
3.400
1
957.000
9
5
Texas
2i>9,6o0
6
13.600
3
309.200
q
173.600
r
y
487.800
14

Total
I.214.600
13
48.200
I 4
1.262.800
17
132.000
6
1,444,800
23
• 1 l- !
j
IX
Cali forn ia
1..400
2
3.000
! 1
4.400
3
2.500
1
6.900
4

Oregon
i .600
2
3.200
i 2
4.80G
4
0
0
4, Boo
4

Wash i nqton
43,200
34
0
! 0
43.200
34
Boo
10
44,000
44 T
Total
46.200
38
6.200
3
52.400
41
3.300
11
55.700
52
iUNITED STATES TOTALS
3.575.200
357 169.200
!
i 29
3.644,400
385
!1.234.900
339
4.879 300
725 ,
-------
National Register of Shellfish Growing Areas	316
Table III
Interstate 
-------
National Register of Shellfish Growing Areas	317
Table IV
	Intrastate Inactive Areas	
Reqion
State
Ful1v Approved
Closed
Tota 1
Acres
Areas
Acres
Areas
Acres
Areas
1
Ma i ne
0
0
0
0
0
0
New Hampshire
0
0
0
0
0
0
Massachusetts
0
0
0
0
0
0
Rhode Island
0
0
0
0
0
0
Connecticut
20.000
3
0
0
20.000
3

Total
20.000
3
0
0
20.000
3








11
New York
60.000
1
3.200
1
63.200
2
New Jersev
13.500
2
6.500
2
20.000
4
Delaware
0
0
500
5
500
5

Total
73.500
3
10.200
8
83.700
11








III
Maryland
0
0
0
0
0
0
V i rq inia
0
0
0
0
0
0
North Carolina
0
0
0
0
0
0

Total
0
0
0
0
0
0








IV
South Carolina
0
0
0
0
0
0
Georq ia
19.300
2
500
2
19.800
4
Florida
0
0
139.500
8
139.500
8
Alabama
0
0
0
0
0
0
Mississippi
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
19.300
2
140.000
10
159.300
12








VII
Lou i s iana
21 .4on
1
0
0
o
o
csi
1
Texas
393.600
6
50.100
6
443.700
12

Total
415 .000
7
50.100
6
465.100
13








IX
Cali fornia
700
1
900
4
1.600
5
Oreqon
o ! o
3.500
6
8.500
6
Wash i nqton
!

-

-
Total
700 j 1
9.400
10
10.100
11
UNITED STATES TOTALS
520.500 16
209.700
34
738.200
50
-------
National Register of Shellfish Growing Areas
Table V
Summary
Approved and Closed


Approved
Closed




Ful lv
Condi t ional1y
Total
Total
Tota
s
irowinq Areas
Acres
Areas
Ac res
Areas
Ac res
Areas
Acres
Areas
Acres
Areas
Interstate
Active
3,636,100
31
19,100
11
3,655,200
42
516,900
62
4,172,100
104

Inactive
36c.100
3


360.100
3
40.000
10
400.100
13
Intrastate
Active
3,575,200
357
69,200
29
3,644,400
386
1,234,900
339
4,879,300
725

Inactive
528.500
16


528.500
16
209.700
34
738.200
50
UNITED STATES TOTALS
8.099,900
407
88.300
40
8.188.200
447
2.001.500
445
10.189.700
892
u>
t—»
oo
-------
National Register of Shellfish Growing Areas
Table VI
	Acres and Areas by States	

Interstate
1 ntrastate
Total
Active Inactive
Total
Act ive
Inact;ve
Total
Req.
Sta'.e
feres Ai issj Acres
Areas
.A.cres
Areas
Acres
Areas
Ac re s
Areas
Acres '.Areas
Ac res
Areas
1
Me.
2. V.,C
' SCO
2
3.3CO
o

! 92
0
n
V
f '
3^9.60c : 1?2
352.30C
20 C
N.H.
-- .
-

-
0
0
0
r\
-
-


Mass. ! 5.500
< ! n
C
5.500
6
33.600
90
ij
0
33.600
=>0
39.100
96
R.I.
91.400
t:
r
G
S! .400
27
,°oo
9
r
0
4.900
9
96.300
36
Conn.
7.800

-
-
7.800
6
55.^0
2?
20.000
3
75.100
26
32.900
32

Total
107.200
4?
¦;00
2
10-.200
^7
443.2C0
31^
2u.coo
3
463.200
317
57!,200
364
















II
N.Y.
38.000
3
371.800
2
409,300
5
511.100
36
63.200
2
574.300
88
984.100
93
N,J.
447.000
3
0
0
447,000
3 j t.ico: 91
20,000
4
77.100
95
524,100
96
Del.
196.000
2
2.300
2
198,300
4 17J00j 12
500
5
17.600
17
215.900
21

Total
681,000
8
374.100
4
1.055.100
12 5-35.300; 189
83.700
11
659,000
200
1 .724,100
212














111
Md.
825.900; 11
0
0
825.900
U t 371.700 ! 34
c
0
371.700
34
1.197.600
45
Ha.
826.000s 6
0
0
826.000
6 | 585.900
17
0
0
585.900
17
1 .411.900
23
N.C.
972.900i 10
0
0
972.900
10 i 0
0
0
0
0
0
972.900
10

Total
2.624.800! 27
0
0
2.624.800
27 1 957.600 ! 51
0
0
957.600
51
3.582.400
78







1 \


j


IV
!
s.c.
18.500
4
0
0
18.500
4 i 164.600 18
0
0
164.600 | 18
183.100
22
Ga.
7.000
1
3.300
2
10.300
3 ! 133.700 16
19.800
4
153.500; 20
163.800
23
Fla.
275.500
10
15.000
1
290.500
11 973.700 49
139.500
8
1.113.200 ¦ 57
1.403.700
68
i
i
Ala.
403.000
6
0
0
403.000: 6
1.900 5 0
0 j 1.900 j 5
404.900
11

Miss.
3.500
1
1.000
1
4.500! 2
118.800 8 0
0 j 118.800 j 8
123.^00
10

Total
707.500
22
19.300
4
726.800i 26 !l .392.700 > 96
159.300
12 ; 1.552.000] 108
2.278.800
134
»




t
»

;


VII
La.
51.400
1
2.500 1
53.900 2j 957.000
9
21,400
1
978,400i 10
1 .032.300
! 2

Tex.
0
0
2.500 1
2.500 1 I 487.800
14
443.700
12
931.500i 26
934.000
27

Total
51.400
1 ! 5.000 ; 2
56.400 3
1.444.800
23
465.100
13
1.909.900
36
1.966.300
39




j









IX
Calif.
0
0
0 0
0
0
6^900
4
1,600 ! 5
8.500
9
8.500
9
Ore.
0
0
o ! o
0
0
4,800

8.500
6
13.300
10
13.300
10
Wash.
200
1
900 i 1
1,100
2
44,000
44
—
- 1 4':, 000
44
45.100
46
Total
200
1
900 1 1
1.100
2
55.700
52
10,100
Hj 65,800
63
66,900
65
I.S. Totals
4.172.100
104
1
?
400.100 ' 13
4.572.200
117
4.879.^00
725
738.200
50 1 5.617, 500
775
10,189,700
892
OO
M
v£>
-------
320
E. M. Wallace
MRS. WALLACE: The time has come for the resolu-
tion of this conference to end the burden the duck Industry
has imposed upon all who depend upon the waters of Great
South Bay for their livelihood.
The installation of a comprehensive sewerage
system in Suffolk County will prevent further deterioration
of the waters of the Sound and the Bays. We are encouraged
to note that the State has offered 58 million dollars to
begin the installation of sewers in Suffolk County.
Here is a copy of a news article, which may or
may not be in the record. It Just documents it. (H&nding
same to Mr. Stein.)
My husband had intended to show as a part of his
exhibit the sludge deposits, deposited on Fire Island when
Forge River was dredged. From these pictures you would be
able to notice the escapage of the sludge into the sea,
which was intended — this is true; but this poses another
problem of dumping into the ocean, Off the shores of Long
Island and extending to Cape Hatteras in North Carolina is
another vast molluscan resource currently produoing 43
millions of pounds of sea or surf clam meats per year.
Waste disposal into the Atlantic Ocean over the continental
shelf is escalating at such a rate as to motivate the
United States Army Engineers to call several conferences,
-------
321
E. M. Wallace
three of which have already been held. Because the
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration has the
responsibility to establish a national policy for the control
and abatement of water pollution, we are bringing this
problem to your attention for action before the kind of
damage is sustained by the sea clam industry that we are
considering here today to four other molluscan species,
namely, hard clams, soft clams, scallops and oysters.
We are confident that the agencies of the State of
New York will comply with the letter and the spirit of the
Water Quality Act of 1965. The people of New York appreciate
the urgency of improving the waters of our State in order
to enjoy and reap the benefits of the resources that are
both a necessity and a birthright.
Thank you.
(Two maps submitted by Mrs.
Wallace will be contained in the
files of the Department as
exhibits.)
MR, STEIN: Thank you, Mrs. Wallace,
I would like to take this opportunity, if there
are any shellfish growers in here, to tell you that I have
seen representatives of trade associations in Washington
over a long period — of many, many trade associations —
-------
322
E. M. Wallace
and probably know most of them.
You have a magnificent bargain in Mrs. Wallace.
She is one of the beBt. Considering the budget that
evidently the shellfish industry operates on as compared to
some of the other industries we deal with, such as the oil
industry, the soap and detergent industry, pulp and paper,
and so forth, she does an outstanding job. The job is done,
as you can see, with beauty, charm, intelligence and hard
work.
Aa always, you are one step ahead of us. You
see, we came up here to do this, and in the next to the
last paragraph she has given us another problem to work on
already. That is how she keeps us off balance all the time.
MRS. WALLACE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR, STEINj I just wanted to say this in front of
some of your constituents, because I am not sure they all
know how hard you work for them down in Washington, When
she is there, she works every minute of the day.
MRS. WALLACE: Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Metzler?
MR. METZLER: Well, of course, after those
complimentary remarks, which I certainly would endorse, it
seems almost inappropriate to ask you a question. Yet, I
am very much interested in this statement about two million
-------
323
E. M. Wallace
acres of shellfish grounds that are closed or Inactive
because of pollution.
MRS. WALLACE: Yes, sir.
MR. METZLER: Is similar action being taken else-
where, and do you anticipate that we are going to get these
opened up again? If pollution is abated, will the industry
reopen these grounds?
MRS. WALLACE: If the Public Health Service will
permit us to do so, you can be sure, as soon as the sanitary
qualities are met, we are in business bigger and better than
ever.
MR. METZLER: You think, though, the industry
actually is interested in getting back at the opening up of
as much of these as they can get Public Health Service
approval for?
MRS. WALLACE: An unqualified "yes, sir."
MR. METZLER: I am glad to hear that. Maybe the
price of oysters won't continue to escalate.
MRS. WALLACE: That is true.
MR. STEIN: Are there any other questions?
MR. METZLER: No.
MR. STEIN: Thank you for a very constructive
statement.
I do have one announcement to make, giving you
-------
324
the schedule.
I suspect that you people who have decided to come
here tomorrow probably have made a wise choice, because you
may have a little larger audience.
If the weather holds, if it does not deteriorate
and our airplanes operate the way we would hope they would
operate, we will have Senator Kennedy here at about nine
o'clock to make his statement. Then we will go on with the
rest of the conference. I think we can do this, although
the Senator has a very, very tight schedule, so we are
looking forward to a very interesting meeting tomorrow.
I think we have had a very productive session here
today, and a very enlightening one. We do have the problem
outlined very, very clearly.
I noticed in your list of witnesses, Mr, Metzler,
that we do have Just one person from the duck industry.
; ; |
I hope we will hear from them to get their point of view,
because I tjhink that is essential in the record, and I hope
that that Representative will bear with us and give us the
point of view here, because we have not gotten that point of
view in the record yet. I know that we are all interested
in hearing it.
Mr. Metzler; do you have anything else?
MR. METZLERj No, only to say that we do have
ten witnesses in addition to the Senator, who have indicated
-------
325
their interest in appearing tomorrow.
If there are any others, let me know.
MR. STEIN: All right. We will now stand
recessed until five minutes to nine, tomorrow morning.
Knowing the schedule that we just received from
Senator Kennedy, we are not going to be able to dawdle once
he gets here. He is going to have to go on promptly at nine.
So we will stand recessed until five minutes to
nine tomorrow.
(Whereupon, at 5:25 p.m., the conference was
recessed until 8:55 a.m. of the following day, Wednesday,
September 21, 1966.)
-------
326
INDEX
STATEMENT OF;	PAGE:
Hon. Robert P. Kennedy	329
James M. Catterson, Jr.	348
Mrs. James R. Sherard	357
E. E. Henkel	366
Emanuel Lichfc	376
Nelson D. Houck	383
William F. Cosulich	392
Maurice BarDash	400
Hugh Mercer	431
Edwin S. Furman	454
Dr. George Vanderborgh	462
Adrian Hoek	466
Robert Vojvoda	471
Charles R. Dominy	478
Closing Statements
-------
327
Conference In the Matter of Pollution of the
Navigable Waters of Moriches Bay and the Eastern Section
of Great South Bay, Long Island, New York, reconvened at
9:20 a.m., on Wednesday, September 21, 1966, at Felice's
Restaurant, Patchogue, New York.
PRESIDING;
Mr. Murray Stein, Assistant Commissioner
for Enforcement, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, Department of the
Interior
CONFEREES:
(As heretofore listed.)
-------
328
PROCEEDINGS
MR. STEIN: May we reconvene?
We will continue with the New York State presenta-
tion. However, as many of you know, Senator Kennedy is due
to arrive rather shortly. Because of the weather, I think
he may be slightly delayed, as he is. He has a very tight
schedule. He is, as far as I know now, due to be back in
Washington, D. C., at 12 o'clock today, and that's going to
take some pushing on our part for him to do it.
I would like to get started, but I would like to
have your maximum cooperation, so the person who is making
his statement may be asked to be interrupted, if we have to,
when the Senator comes in.
With that, I will call on Mr. Metzler.
MR. METZLER: Let's get off the record here for
Just a minute, please.
MR. STEIN: Surely.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. STEIN: I would like to thank all of you for
braving the weather today. We didn't brave the weather the
first day. The first day we braved oratory to come here.
The Senator, with all of his interests, also has
-------
329
Hon. Robert P. Kennedy
a tremendous interest In New York's water resources, New
York's natural resources, and particularly, as far as we are
concerned, in keeping the waters clean. The Senator does
his homework, and does his homework so well, he keeps us
doing our homework too.
Senator Robert Kennedy of New York.
STATEMENT OP THE HONORABLE ROBERT P. KENNEDY,
UNITED STATES SENATOR PROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK
SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you, Mr. Stein.
First, I want to thank you for your interest and
the effort that you have made not only in holding this
conference and being willing to come up here and taking this
personal interest, but for the interest that you have taken
in all of these kinds of problems throughout the State of
New York,
I think that your efforts and your personal
endeavors have made a major difference for us, and I think,
without any doubt, the stimulation that you have given both
for Lake Erie and for the Hudson River, and now for the tip
of Long Island, has been very, very important and very,
very significant for any of the progress that we have made,
or at least the interest that we have taken toward trying
-------
330
Hon. Robert P. Kennedy
to make some progress.
I welcome this opportunity to testify before
this conference on the pollution problems of Moriches and
Great South Bays.
On August 3, 1966, Congressman Otis Pike and I
requested Secretary Udall to convene this conference. We
made this request because of the growing dangers of pollution
to the economy of Suffolk County and those who enjoy the
beaches and waters.
Our request was based on a provision included in
the Federal Water Pollution legislation passed by the
Congress last year which states that the Secretary of the
Interior can call a water pollution enforcement action if he
finds that pollution of waters within one State makes it
impossible to market shellfish from its waters in interstate
commerce.
This is Just what has happened in these two bays
bordering Long Island's south shore. It has been estimated
that clams and oysters worth more than $2,500,000 cannot be
harvested each year because of the pollution entering
Moriches and Great South Bays. The New York State Conserva-
tion Department has closed major portions of these waters
to shellflshing because agricultural and residential sewage
has contaminated local shellfish.
-------
331
Hon. Robert P. Kennedy
The effects of water pollution can be seen in
the records of the last decades. In 19^1, 1,700,000 bushels
of oysters were taken from Long Island's waters. In 1963,
the harvest was minimal, a mere 60,000 bushels. The Blue
Point oyster, a byword to those who appreciate seafood, has
all but disappeared. Similarly, the clam harvest has
dropped from a high of 672,000 bushels in 19^7 to a level
of 210,000 bushels in 1963.
There is no question that pollution is partly
responsible for this loss. For all of the areas close to
Long Island's shore as specified in the New York State
Conservation Department's order of March 15, 1966, are out
of bounds to shellfish harvesters. The clam harvest might
well be doubled if these areas were open to shell fishermen.
And if the pollution In these bays increases, the Conserva-
tion Department may have to decree that no shellfish be
taken from these waters.
But although this conference centers on the
dangers to shellfish, the problems of water pollution in
Moriches and Great South Bays illustrate the problem that
faces all of our wetlands and coastal bays on each coast.
Whether it is Great South Bay, Hempstead and Oyster Bay, on
Nassau County's south shore, Chesapeake Bay, the tidewaters
of the Carolines or the Gulf of Mexico, these coastal areas
-------
332
Hon. Robert P. Kennedy
all share pollution problems.
The major problem Is the expansion of our popula-
tion Into rural and suburban areas. As families move out
of our cities into attractive towns and villages, they
bring with them requirements that these small communities
have not faced in the past. New highways, homes, schools
and stores must be constructed to serve these growing
communities. And special community facilities such as
sewers, sewage treatment plants, and power lines must be
constructed. For without these facilities, the seeds of
blight blossom into decay as these communities grow older.
If we do not demand the municipal planning that
predicts our sewage treatment needs; if we do not demand
the zoning laws and bond issues that guarantee that new
homes and new industries do not dump raw wastes into local
rivers and bays, we will spoil the land that we settle.
Unfortunately, this has all too often been our pattern of
suburban development.
Suffolk County is a good example of this problem,
for it is now experiencing a major population increase. The
pattern of development in Suffolk over the next ten years
will determine whether we will know eastern Long Island as
an area of magnificent beaches, of handsome communities,
-------
333
Hon. R. P. Kennedy
and of challenging employment, or whether we know It as an
area of suburban sprawl, of ruined natural resources, of
contaminated beaches, of lost opportunities.
We need only to look west to Nassau County to
recognize the scope of the problem. In 1920, Suffolk and
Nassau Counties had roughly the same population, 110,000
and 120,000 respectively. By 1950, Nassau had a population
of 673,000, while Suffolk had only 276,000. Between 1950
and i960, Nassau County more than doubled in population,
and today it has a population of almost l-£ million. The
new residents of Nassau County in many cases overwhelmed
local public services, with the resulting destruction of
natural resources.
Our economists predict that Suffolk County will
have a population of l-£ million by 1985. If Suffolk County
is to profit from Nassau's experience, action must be taken
now to prevent the destruction of local resources. Every
dredging license and every building permit must be analyzed
in terms of its effect on local resources. We must ask
what the effect of dredging will have on Mt. Sinai Harbor.
Is it necessary to provide additional marina space?
We must ask whether New York State and Federal
regulations are being followed in developments along the
Nissequoque River.
-------
33^
Hon. Robert P. Kennedy
We must ask how the Long Island Lighting Company
will handle the cooling waters from its proposed nuclear power
plant on the North Shore. Will these cooling waters destroy
fish life in the area where they are discharged? Or will
Long Island Lighting provide ponds, towers or artificial
streams that will cool these waters before they are dis-
charged into Long Island Sound?
We must also ask ourselves whether we can continue
to build cesspools and septic tanks to handle the sewage
from individual homes in Suffolk County. At what point will
eastern Long Island's water table be polluted by cesspools?
When the population reaches 1 million? l-£ million? l-£
million? There is one positive answer to this question. If
we do not build sewer lines and sewage treatment plants, we
will pollute the groundwater on eastern Long Island. And
this, in turn, will pollute the wetlands and bays.
Today we are considering the problem of pollution
in Moriches and Great South Bays, There are several major
sources of this pollution. The duck farms located along
the streams that feed into these bays and along the shores
of these bays are the major source of pollution. Duck
wastes are carried into the bays and pollute the waters close
to shore.
The Long Island duckling, famous for its flavor
-------
335
Hon. Robert P. Kennedy
and tenderness, is mainly raised on eastern Long Island,
They grow in the marshes and pens along Suffolk County's
south shore. In 196^, sales of ducks and other poultry
products from Suffolk County totaled $9,162,000, or one-
fifth of the agriculture products produced by Suffolk
County.
Unfortunately, the wastes produced from these
duck farms are carried by streams, tide and seepage into
these bays. If the water circulation in these bays is
poor, the area banned to shellfish harvesters is increased.
And if these wastes are not limited, all of Moriches and
Great South Bay may be placed off limits to shell fishermen.
Municipal wastes are also a problem. The wastes
from a small part of the population, the 5,000 people in
the village of Patchogue, are treated by a local treatment
plant that removes 30 percent of the active ingredients.
Today, the pollution from this source is only 5 percent of
that from the duck farms.
But most people in the drainage areas of these
bays have cesspools or septic tanks. Disposal of sewage
in this manner is only a temporary solution. For in suf-
ficient quantity, these cesspools and septic tanks will
pollute the groundwater. As population grows in Belleport
Center, Moriches, Mastic Beach, and Patchogue, sewers and
-------
336
Hon. Robert P. Kennedy
sewage treatment plants must be constructed.
In this case we do not have to choose between
ducks and clams. Suffolk County now has the opportunity to
treat both its agricultural and municipal wastes. Combined
sewage treatment plants can be constructed to serve both
local residents and the duck farms. The waters draining
from the duck farms can be processed by local treatment
plants before being discharged into Moriches and Great
South Bays. And the municipalities can pay for the extra
sewage treatment plant capacity needed to serve the duck
farms by charging a fee for this service.
As a result of action taken by the Congress this
year, the Federal Government stands ready to assist Suffolk
County in constructing sewers and sewage treatment plants.
The water pollution control legislation that I co-sponsored
with Senator Muskie this year provides $6 billion over the
next six years to meet problems of the type you face here.
This bill increases the amount currently
available from $150 million this year to $1.5
billion a year by 1971.
This bill will provide more than $550 million
to New York State over the next six years.
This bill increases the Federal share to
50 percent of costs in some cases.
-------
337
Hon. Robert F. Kennedy
This bill removes limitations on individual
grants so that cities such as Buffalo, Rochester,
and Syracuse can receive grants that help meet the
costs of projects of $36 million, $33 million and
$30 million respectively.
This bill establishes a revolving Federal
loan fund to help communities finance their share
of the costs of new construction.
And the bill allows States to prefinance the
Federal share of approved projects to insure that
there will be no delay in initiating construction.
This bill passed the Senate on July 13, 1966. It
puts muscle behind the Senate's resolve to clean up our
waters.
Unfortunately, the House version of this bill
does not include the same amount of money, it only
authorized $2.45 billion over the next five years. It
neglects the fact that sewer and sewage treatment plant con-
struction are major capital expenditures that take several
years to plan and several years to build. Unless we authorize
the necessary funds now, these sewers and plants will not be
constructed.
When this bill is reported to the House Floor,
I know that members of the New York Congressional Delegation,
-------
338
Hon. Robert F. Kennedy-
such as Congressman Pike, Congressman Murphy, Congressman
Tenzer, and Congressman McCarthy will do what they can to
increase the funds authorized by the bill. I am hopeful
that they are successful in increasing the funds authorized
by this bill. Their success or failure will partially be
determined by the support they receive from the Administra-
tion. I again urge the Administration's support for the
increased water pollution funds, funds that would add
substance to the Administration's expressed interest in
water pollution.
There is a connected problem that plagues our
efforts to reduce water pollution. Although Federal
assistance is available to help construct the sewage treat-
ment plant and the interceptor sewers that are the major
arteries of a sewer system, a very limited amount of
assistance is available to help construct lateral sewers,
the sewers that collect wastes from the individual homes.
Yet, without this vital third of a sewage disposal system,
the system cannot function..
The Department of Housing and Urban Development
now has a total of $100 million each year to pay up to half
of the costs of construction of lateral sewer systems.
As of September 1, 1966, they had received requests totaling
$2.6* billion more than 25 times the amount available.
-------
339
Hon. Robert F. Kennedy
There can be no question that additional funds
must be provided to help construct lateral sewers. This
program must be increased if Suffolk County is to meet its
water pollution problem. I urge the Administration to request
the funds for the coming year necessary to bring this program
into balance with the rest of our water pollution control
efforts.
But in the meantime, with the assistance of
Congressman John Dow and Congressman Richard Ottinger, an
amendment will be offered to the housing bill currently
before the House allowing communities to prefinance the
construction of lateral sewer systems without losing their
eligibility to receive Federal assistance. This provision
would allow those communities that face initial decisions
regarding water pollution control to act now, even if
Federal lateral sewer construction funds are not currently
available.
The Federal Government can also help by stabilizing
Moriches Inlet. This action will Increase the circulation
of the tidal waters moving in these bays and dilute existing
pollution. I am asking the Corps of Engineers to undertake
the necessary studies required to stabilize Moriches Inlet.
This Federal assistance provides some of the
tools needed to combat water pollution. But it does not
-------
340
Hon. Robert F. Kennedy
provide the resolve and the work necessary to do the job.
No amount of Federal assistance can remedy a situation where
a sewage treatment plant recently constructed in response
to a request from the New York State Conservation Department
is left unused, as has occurred in Southampton.
You may wish to organize those interested in the
conservation of Moriches and Great South Bays into a
Moriches and Great South Bays Conservation Commission, as
suggested by the Citizens Committee for the Fire Island
National Seashore,
But it is up to you to demand that bond issues
be passed to pay the local share of sewer system construction
for all of Suffolk County. It is up to you to see that
local zoning laws require sewage treatment for all new con-
struction. It is up to you, who know and treasure eastern
Long Island's natural resources, to act now.
We can intelligently develop and conserve eastern
Long Island — or we can destroy it. I know that we will
make the right decision.
I have tried to stress, Mr. Chairman, in this
statement that although the struggle and the attention now
is in connection with the ducks and with our claws and
with our oysters, I think the problem is far more complex,
-------
341
Hon. Robert F. Kennedy
and far deeper than that. The problem that Is facing this
part of Long Island I think is far more serious than that.
This obviously requires our immediate attention,
but I think to realize the problems that are going to
exist in this part of our State over the period of the next
twenty years, with the tremendous growth of population and
the tremendous growth that is going to take place, the
tremendous problems that we are going to have to deal with
twenty years from now — unless we handle intelligently
this problem immediately we are facing a most serious
situation. That comes from the increase of population, the
increase of factories, stores, houses, homes, schools,
which will increase our problem of pollution. So, although
I am happy that we are focusing attention on it now because
of the difficulty and the conflict between the ducks and
the clams and the oysters, I want to make sure that we
consider not only that and what can be done about that --
and I think some things can be, as I have outlined. I also
want to make sure that we all understand that the problem
is far more complex, far more difficult and that if we are
going to have the kind of Long Island and the kind of
eastern Long Island that I know the people out here want,
we are going to have to take steps now that go far beyond
dealing just with the problem of our ducks.
-------
342
Hon. Robert P. Kennedy
MR, STEIN: Thank you, Senator, very much, for
a magnificent statement, and a very superb analysis.
You can see we don't get glittering generalities.
The Senator has put his finger on what we have spent perhaps
a day or more in arriving at.
Let me assure you, Senator, that while the ducks
got us out here and the shellfish, we did arrive at more
or less the same conclusions,after hearing all the people
here, that you have outlined.
As we see the problem, there are four major
problems that have to be dealt with, and dealt with now:
One is the pollution coming from people in the
factories.
The second is the duck pollution.
The third is, we have to get into the bay and do
something about the accumulated sludge in the bay and get
that out.
The fourth aspect of the problem is stabilizing
the inlets, such as Morichea Inlet and Jones Inlet, so that
we can have that delicate balance of saline and fresh water
to produce the exact ecological conditions necessary.
For the Federal Government, I would like to pledge
at least the Executive's ability to give this highest
-------
343
Hon, Robert P. Kennedy
priority and work with you and the State people, and,
hopefully, the local people, in arriving at these solutions.
SENATOR KENNEDY: I am delighted to hear that.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Metzler, do you have any comment?
MR. METZLER: I was particularly pleased, Senator,
to hear your comments about the current bill which is before
the Congress, the 1966 Pure Waters Act.
Of course, as you know, New York believes that
the Senate version, which you and Senator Javits supported,
is far more adequate.
My question: Is there anything which you would
suggest, beyond your prepared remarks, which we can do to
bring the House version, as reported out by the House Public
Works Committee, more in line with the Senate?
SENATOR KENNEDY: Well, I think there has to be
great public interest and great public demand for it.
It is going to mean, as I think I pointed out
here, $550 million for the State of New York. The House
version is going to be Just a fraction of that.
If we are going to deal with these kinds of
problems out here in Long Island, and deal with the problems
that affect the rest of our State, we are going to have to
have this larger sum of money.
The State of New York has indicated that they are
-------
344
Hon. Robert P. Kennedy
going to put up a billion dollars themselves through our
bond issue, so we are willing to do our part. However, I
think that in this whole effort we can talk about pollution
and we can make speeches about pollution, but unless we are
willing to put up the money to deal with it, then I think
we are Just deceiving ourselves.
If we have only the House bill, then we are not
going to be able to accomplish the task here in the State
of New York over the period of the next five years. I
would think our situation, instead of improving, is going
to become more serious,
I mentioned the figures out here for Suffolk
County and the fact that we are going to have a population
of 1,500,000 in the next twenty years, but we also have to
consider that the State of New York in the next thirty years
is going to have 10 million more people living in here.
Where they are going to live, and the stores,
the factories, the Jobs, their homes, their recreation,
this kind of situation is all going to descend on us and
descend on our children. Unless we take the action now, the
problems they are going to face are going to be so much
greater and so much more immense.
It seems to me we have a responsibility to the
next generation of New Yorkers to do something about It.
-------
345
Hon. Robert P. Kennedy
I am terribly interested in pollution, because I think
that that is just going to affect all of our lives, and
affect the environment in which we grow ourselves. Also it
will affect the kind of a State that we are going to turn
over to the next generation.
I have taken my interest around the State. I
think that this is one of the most valuable assets that we
have, the eastern part of Long Island, and I think that that
asset will be destroyed if we allow the waters that surround
eastern Long Island to be polluted.
We can develop its industry; we can develop its
economy; and at the same time I think we can preserve it in
a way that it means so much to the people who live here
already, and for the people who will grow up here in future
generations.
That is why we are here — why this meeting is
so important, and why I have flown up here today to give
my statement, because I think it is so vital and so important.
However, I think that there has to be attention
on the importance of the Senate bill over the House bill.
Those people who feel strongly about it should contact their
Congressmen and make their views known, and I would hope the
State of New York would make an active effort in that.
MR. METZLERj I might say in this respect that
-------
346
Hon. Robert P. Kennedy
we are contacting the New York Delegation in support of the
Senate version.
SENATOR KENNEDY; And I think also whatever can be
done, if we have contacts in other States — because this
is going to affect other States as well — we should get
them busy on it.
MR. METZLER: Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Are there any further comments or
questions?
(No response.)
MR. STEIN: If not, thank you very much.
SENATOR KENNEDY: I am flying back to vote.
MR. STEIN: We understand that.
SENATOR KENNEDY: And I appreciate your putting me
on early, so that I could do so.
MR. STEIN: We are delighted that you could come,
and your analysis and your help will certainly move us
forward,
I would like to mention just one or two more things
before you go, Senator.
I think we do have the State and the Federal
Government ready to help with this. Obviously, this problem
cannot be handled here unless we have State, Federal and
local full cooperation. We need the local cooperation.
-------
347
Hon. Robert F, Kennedy
SENATOR KENNEDY: Absolutely.
MR, STEIN: I have one more point, and I think
this should be emphasized.
We are trying an experiment here that we have not
seen anywhere else. Any large city with a large population
generally has a surface water supply. You do not have one
in Long Island. Our challenge is really great here.
We have this underground water supply. We have
the water around us. If we are just going to have the
people here, the Industries, the factories, and the schools,
and do with the water that we have here, we are really
going to have to be not only ingenious, but we are going to
have to be cooperative, and we are going to have to devise
governmental systems that can handle this problem, Just for
survival and growth.
SENATOR KENNEDY: That's very good.
Thank you very much, Mr. Stein, once again.
MR. STEIN: Thank you very much,
(Applause,)
MR. STEIN: Let's have a five-minute recess.
(Whereupon a recess was had.)
MR, STEIN: May we reoonvene?
I think with a little effort, we can settle down.
Mr. Metzler?
-------
J. M. Catterson, Jr.
3^8
MR. METZLER: Thank you.
I am aware that each' of you who are interested
really have no idea of when you are appearing. One of the
witnesses said yesterday that I surprised her a little bit,
so would you mind if I read off the list of witnesses in
the order that I have them? If there is any great dissension
as far as this order, if you will let me know, if you are
inconvenienced by the order in which you come, let me know.
Otherwise, we will put them on in this order.
Mr. Catterson will be next, then Mrs. Sherard,
Mr. Henkel for the County Sewer Authority, Hugh Mercer,
Mr. Barbash, Mr. Purman, Mr. Llcht, Dr. Vanderborgh, Mr.
Hoek, Nelson Hbuck, and Mr. Cosulich — in that order.
Hearing no objection, then let's proceed.
Mr. James Catterson, who is Chairman of the
Brookhaven Town Oceanography Committee.
Mr. Catterson.
STATEMENT OP JAMES M. CATTERSON, JR., CHAIRMAN,
BROOKHAVEN TOWN OCEANOGRAPHY COMMITTEE
MR, CATTERSONs Good morning. Mr. Chairman,
ladles and gentlemen:
My name is James M. Catteraon, Jr., and I am the
-------
3^9
J. M. Catterson, Jr.
Chairman of the Brookhaven Town Oceanography Committee.
This committee, for those of you who are not
familiar with Brookhaven Town, was recently formed with the
objective of pooling the resources of the town as far as
industry, science, university, business, with the aim of
coordinating all efforts on the town level, and possibly on
the level of Suffolk County, to encourage and develop, where
possible, an interest in oceanography, the production of
the sea, and those other fields of science and industrial
endeavor which will enable us to exploit to the fullest the
natural resources around this county, which, I might add,
has the longest shoreline of the State of New York,
Of course, interest in the Great South Bay with
our committee is paramount. It goes without saying that
you can't be interested in the production of the sea without
a parallel interest in the estuaries, the bays, the marshes
and the coves, for from these spring the life that you
gentlemen here — the scientists and the men of marine
science — know fully too well.
Let me point out at the outset, Mr. Chairman,
I am not a scientist. I am not a physicist. I am an
attorney, and therefore I do not deign to tell you gentlemen
or even advise or make any comments upon the very fine
presentations you have heard here today; but I do think at
-------
350
J. M. Catterson, Jr.
this time, Mr. Chairman, it might do well to review, that
which an attorney can do, the legal ramifications and the
legal precedents In those steps which have taken place
heretofore, which point out that the people of Suffolk
County and the Town of Brookhaven have not been unaware of
our problem in the Great South Bay, but, in fact, have been
aware of this problem for many, many years,
MR. STEIN: You know, we are in good company.
The Senator is an attorney too, and you saw the analysis
he made.
MR. CATTERSON: I heard that this morning. In
fact, I used to work for him for a short time -- in the
Department of Justice, that is.
Now, as far back as 1951 to 1958, the Woods Hole
Institute, as you are familiar, made comprehensive studies
of the Great South Bay, particularly the pollution problem
at the Moriches Inlet and Shinnecock. Their reports are
extensively covered in the Corps of Engineers report of
1959, which attributes directly and as the main cause of
pollution in the Great South Bay the shoaling and the closing
off periodically of the Moriches Bay Inlet.
If I may quote briefly from the Engineers• survey
report, which includes a quote from the Woods Hole survey
— and this, incidentally, is at Page 33 of the Moriches
-------
351
J. M. Catterson, Jr.
and Shinnecock Inlet letter from the Secretary of the Army
transmitting the report referred to to the Committee on
Public Works, May 1959 -- it says:
"The closing of the Moriches Inlet from 1951
through 1953 during the course of the Woods Hole
study affords a recent comparison of the conditions
in Moriches Bay with and without the inlet.
"In 1950, before the inlet closed, the
salinity in Moriches Bay averaged 28 parts per
thousand for about 85 percent of sea water, the
excess amount of phosphorus averaged..."
and it goes into certain details which you gentlemen have
already discussed.
In 1950, the Woods Hole report concluded that,
"The unsatisfactory condition of Great South
Bay for the production of oysters was the result
of excessive pollution by organic matter, particu-
larly originating in Moriches Bay. The closure" of
Moriches Inlet in 1951 had the effect of gravely
retarding the escape of pollutants from Moriches
Bay and more of the pollutants reached Bellport
Bay than prior to the closure."
The 195^ Woods Hole report, which was made after
additional investigations, concluded as follows:
-------
352
J. M. Catterson, Jr.
"It Is imperative that Moriches Inlet be
maintained in as open a condition as possible.
Closure of the inlet would certainly be followed
by the cesspool-like conditions of Moriches Bay
experienced from 1951 to 1953. Further decrease
in the concentration of pollutant chemicals in
the bay water may not be expected without further
and more effective employment of sanitary engineer-
ing practices on the duck farms."
The 195*1 report further found that with Moriches
Inlet opened, that tidal exchange between Moriches Bay and
Bellport Bay is reduced, and the condition in Bellport
Bay and Great South Bay is improved.
The 1956 Woods Hole report, based on a survey made
during August of that year, found that pollution in Great
South Bay had not abated, and that the improved conditions
for the growth of shellfish that were noted may be ascribed
entirely to the tidal flushing action through Moriches Inlet.
The 1957 Woods Hole report concluded thati
"If improved conditions in Great South Bay are
to continue, it is mandatory that Moriches Inlet be
widened, deepened and stabilized as quickly as
possible."
Taking heed of the Corps of Engineers' recommends-
-------
353
J, M. Catterson, Jr.
tions, the Congress In i960 enacted the i960 Rivers and
Harbors Act, which authorized an expenditure of some
$6,468,000 for the stabilization of Moriches Inlet and for
Moriches Bay Inlet. This was signed and passed Into law in
July of i960 by then President Eisenhower.
In 1962, the County of Suffolk authorized the
expenditure of $3 million to meet its share In this Federal
project. New York State at that time also authorized its
matching funds to meet the improvement of the Moriches
Bay Inlet Stabilization Project.
On August 19* 1966, we pointed out that between
I960 and 1966, not one penny of Federal funds had been
authorized by the Congress under this Administration to
stabilize the Moriches Bay Inlet.
In 1966 alone, we have already had three fatali-
ties in the Great South Bay, and over 18 injuries, as a
direct result of the shoaling action of the Moriches Bay
Inlet. I realize, of course, that safety is not the para-
mount purpose of this meeting. However, it certainly goes
hand in glove that we are just as much interested in public
safety as we are in duck wastes or potato bugs, for that
matter; and, therefore, I respectfully request that and
would note that any contemplation of pollution, where It
does go Into an overlapping Federal jurisdiction such as
-------
354
J. M. Catterson, Jr.
the Corps of Engineers, must be coordinated, so that we
can bring all forces to bear at one time.
After I pointed out on August 19, 1966, that the
Congressman from this District had evinced little, if any
interest, in this project, except to give it lip service,
and that he had not only failed to appear before the
Appropriations Committee, the Public Works Subcommittee,
to present Long Island and Suffolk County's position in
this matter, but that he had even failed to file a statement
requesting funds from the Appropriations Committee to begin
this project, it was only then that he, in informal con-
versations with members of the Appropriations Committee,
prevailed upon them to allocate some funds for the Moriches
Inlet Project.
Therefore, we find that in a news release of
September 16, 1966, $100,000 have been earmarked by the
Appropriations Committee to get this project to stabilize
Moriches Bay Inlet under way.
Of course, we also find $200,000 for East Rockaway
Inlet, and some other work for Great Neck.
Now, far be it from me to suggest that these funds
have anything to do with November 8th, or the fact that they
are located in districts which contain incumbent Congressmen
of the Administration's party which are running for office
-------
355
J. M. Catterson, Jr.
at this time. I am sure it has nothing to do with it.
The fact does remain, however, that in 1965 a
letter was written to Mr. Kennedy, the previous speaker,
urging him to take action to bring all the forces that he
could bear on the immediate pressing job of stabilizing
Moriches Bay Inlet, providing for the safety of the people
and decreasing pollution.
I note at long last in his statement today on
Page H, that he is asking the Corps of Engineers to under-
take the necessary studies to stabilize the Moriches Inlet.
I am sure the Senator must have been told by the Congressman
from this District that such studies were undertaken in 1958.
Why have I brought all this to bear?
Mr. Chairman, the people of Suffolk County full
well realize the vast importance to the Great South Bay.
The pollution problem has been with us for many years, and
in a country that can appropriate only yesterday 3.07
billion dollars for foreign aid, and also report, out of
committee, 2.4 billion dollars for the poverty funds -- is
it possible, sir, that rather than engage in another tack,
that the Engineers could be authorized and urged by yourself
and by this committee to undertake a reasonable expenditure
of moneys to improve the inlet and to take advantage of
the scientific reports that have been available since 1951*
-------
356
J. M. Catterson, Jr.
which attribute much of the pollution caused to the lack
of flushing action, and which could be corrected by the
Moriches Bay Inlet Stabilization Project?
I say this with full knowledge that we of Suffolk
County will take advantage of any Federal funds from what-
ever source they come, be they from the Pollution Act or
from the Corps of Engineers; but it seems a shame at this
late date to raise a hue and cry of the pollution in Great
South Bay, when all along we have been acutely aware of
the problem, and have been only requesting the Federal
Government to do its fair share.
Thank you very much.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
Are there any comments?
MR. METZLER: Well, I don't think I have comments.
It seems to me these remarks have brought the
problem in focus from the local point of view very well.
MR. STEINi Well, Mr. Catterson, let me make one
comment on the record, and then we can get off the record.
No one is saying that the pollution problem has
Just come into being here. It is recognized this is a long-
term problem.
The reason we are just here now is the law was
recently amended authorizing us to get into a problem of
-------
357
Mrs. J, R. Sherard
this kind, by the Federal Government. We could not have
done this before without a request from the Governor.
MR. CATTERSON: Mr. Chairman?
MR. STEIN: Go ahead.
MR. CATTERSON: We just say welcome aboard.
MR. STEIN: Now, let me get off the record, if
you don't mind.
MR. CATTERSON: Certainly.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. STEIN: All right. Let's get on the record.
MR. METZLER: The next witness for New York
State is the Water Resources Chairman of the Suffolk County
League of Women Voters, Mrs. James Sherard.
Mrs. Sherard.
STATEMENT OP MRS. JAMES R. SHERARD, VICE
PRESIDENT, LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS, TOWN
OP ISLIP; CHAIRMAN, WATER RESOURCES COM-
MITTEE, SUFFOLK COUNTY COUNCIL
MRS. SHERARD: I would like to say, Mr. Chairman,
at this time, and remind everyone that we are a non-
partisan group (laughter), and, in specifics, I might say
that all of us are quite aware of the establishment of the
-------
358
Mrs. J. R. Sherard
Fire Island National Seashore In this area. This, Mr.
Chairman, was, I believe, an excellent example of bipartisan
support.
We in the League have tried to work with both
parties. Sometimes we are not as effective as we would like
to be, but nonpartisan support is what we believe in.
I am appearing here today as a representative of
over 600 members in the six Leagues of Women Voters in
Suffolk County: Bellport, Huntington, Isllp, North
Brookhaven, Riverhead and Smithtown. We appreciate the
opportunity to speak here today. May I say that we are
pleased that you have decided to hold an enforcement
conference here at this time.
I know, Mr. Chairman, yesterday, when Dr. Leone
was speaking, you called him to task for saying that this
conference would bring to light the problems of water pollu-
tion in the county, but I would like to reaffirm this, that
hopefully this conference will focus public attention on
the pollution problems in all of Suffolk County, and, of
course, more specifically, pollution in the valuable
estuaries of Moriches and Eastern Great South Bay.
League concern over the ecological balance of our
marine estuaries goes back many years. Our first conserva-
tion study led to our active support of county acquisition
-------
359
Mrs. J. R. Sherard
of river wetland areas. We later participated in the citizen
campaign that led to the creation of the Fire Island National
Seashore.
Last year at this time, Leagues throughout the
county worked diligently to get out a "yes" vote on the
New York State Pure Waters Bond Issue. We held a well-
attended Water Resources Institute to spotlight the
importance of the bond issue to Suffolk County and
distributed thousands of bumper stickers and pamphlets.
We realized at that time that with the passage of the
proposition, our work was Just beginning.
This year Leagues in Suffolk County have joined
together in a further study of water pollution in Suffolk
County directed specifically to the need for a sewer
system and sewage treatment to prevent further pollution
of our underground and surface waters. Our study group has
also explored various solutions being offered as stop-
gap measures until such time as the entire county is served
by adequate sewerage facilities. Thus far, we have not had
the opportunity to bring all this information to our member-
ship and come up with specific answers which we will actively
support. Nevertheless, we would like to share possible
answers with this conference.
I think many of you whom we have worked together
-------
360
Mrs. J. R. Sherard
with In this room have often said the League Is always
studying. I think that most of you are aware that we
also act.
Our study has led up to a long list of offenders.
In the words of Gilbert and Sullivan, "We've got a little
list of society offenders that never would be missed."
This list ranges from duck farmers to dredgers, from Sunday
gardeners to restaurants, from cesspool cleaners to State
Hospitals, from our next-door neighbor's boat to our own
washing machines. Not one of these could be exempt from
responsibility. This enforcement conference should consider
all; for all can and do affect the purity of our surface
and underground waters.
Naturally, one of our first questions was what is
being done about these and other offenders. Our Federal, State,
county and local governments have laws, ordinances, and regula-
tions on the books to help combat this pollution. Are they
efficient or not? Some are adequate and some inadequate, but
a law without enforcement is all but useless. Our committee
found that In the area of water pollution In Suffolk County
those people or commercial enterprises that abide by the law
or attempt to seek legal means to correct conditions which
are Illegal sometimes suffer most from decisions of the
courts and public officials. The shellfish industry abides
-------
361
Mrs. J. R. Sherard
by the law and does not take shellfish from polluted water.
At the same time, polluters who are under order to stop
polluting are given continuous extensions of time to up-
date their facilities. A restaurant on the water, under
order to clean out its cesspool at regular intervals,
abides by the law at considerable expense, but is next
to another who, because of lack of enforcement, completely
disregards the law. Our health and conservation departments
have been working diligently to get conformity to laws and
regulations. It sometimes seems odd to think of an enforce-
ment office, figuratively speaking, down on its knees
pleading to the offender to "cease and desist."
We are interested in the pilot treatment plant for
duck wastes which, after many years of discussion, according
to the press release recently, is under way. We hope this
first will not be last, A pilot treatment facility for
laundromats, which makes it more economically feasible
for laundromat owners to conform to regulations, is being
tested. These are just two examples of what can be done
when public officials decide something must be done about
a critical situation. A new State law requiring sanitary
facilities on boats could lead to interesting enforcement
procedures, (Laughter.)
-------
362
Mrs. J. R. Sherard
We have also found that personnel In the health
and conservation departments are overworked and underpaid
considering the degree of training required. We must have
adequate inspection for enforcement, and we cannot have
adequate inspection without sufficient trained personnel.
The public should demand adequate funds for these purposes.
Now, what about the regulations and laws them-
selves? Suffolk County's phenomenal growth, which Senator
Kennedy stated and many other people have talked about today,
from 276,000 in 1950 to 600,000 in I960, to close to
1,000,000 today, and a projected 2,000,000 in 20 years, has
meant that regulations sufficient for today are outmoded by
tomorrow. In the health department, the same men who are
working overtime to enforce present regulations are at the
same time conceiving new regulations and attempting to get
conformity, with the result that sometimes, under public
pressure, town governments have written ordinances which
are even stricter than current health regulations. At
other times, builders and the general public have had to go
to extra expense in order to conform to regulations
which had recently been changed. Couldn't regulations be
designed that would be sufficient for projected growth of
several years?
We also find that our present laws exempt Suffolk
-------
363
Mrs. J. R. Sherard
County from a law giving the Conservation Department
jurisdiction over wetlands. We are told that the reason
for this was that Suffolk County standards were higher than
New York State's, but the result seems to be that we end up
with no enforcement at all. What is the answer to this?
Some towns have called in the State Conservation Department
to make a survey of wetlands so that the town can go about
preserving them. Should all towns do this? Should this be
a county-wide project? Other questions that we are con-
sidering are: Should we have a commission made up of all
levels of government and all concerned departments, a
commission empowered to protect wetlands and surface waters?
Should builders be required to get permission from the
State Conservation Department as they do from the County
Health Department? Any such project would, of course,
require more trained personnel In the present State Con-
servation Department.
In many areas, Moriches and Great South Bay
included, various interests are in competition with one
another. A master plan for the bays that would take into
account the preservation of our irreplaceable natural
resources might be the answer. This master plan, of course,
would have to be based on a thorough study, parts of which
might be a study of studies already made and lying in
-------
364
Mrs. J. R. Sherard
someone's library gathering dust.
One of the questions we are exploring is whether
or not more areas should be declared emergency areas and
forced to up-date their sewerage facilities on the basis of
Conservation Department studies done for the shellfish
industries. The classification of waters demands waters
equivalent to drinking water for shellfish. To allow
primary treatment of wastes to go into these waters seems
self-defeating. Individual areas within the proposed sewer
districts are already under order to up-date their facili-
ties and are thus exempt from referendum. What about other
areas?
Finally, may we say that it has often been public
pressure that has moved things along. The public must
continue to demand enforcement of fair and equitable laws
in the public Interest. The League and other citizen groups
in Suffolk County do have an interest. We hope that various
agencies concerned will continue to inform us and utilize
what has become a strong conservation movement in this
county.
Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mrs. Sherard.
Do you have any questions, Mr. Klashman?
ME. KLASHMAN: No, except that I want to compliment
-------
365
Mrs. J. R. Sherard
you, Mrs. Sherard, on your very fine statement,
I enjoyed your poetry, "We've got a list of
society offenders."
MR. METZLER: Well, I want to make a comment
rather than ask you a question.
This is a very excellently prepared statement,
and it is very constructive in nature. I like the specifics
in it.
I must confess that I am a little embarrassed by
your allusion to our pleading with polluters, but I also
must be quite honest and say that is the way it has been in
the past.
I want to tell you now that I believe that with
the Pure Waters Program and the adequate basis of law which
we have to back it up, this is no longer necessary. I want
to assure you that it is the intention of the Health Depart-
ment that we will do all the education we can, but we do
not intend to do any more pleading.
We are in the business of cleaning up pollution,
and we are going to get the Job done, with all the support
that you and many other people in New York are giving us,
MRS. SHERARD: That is very good to hear.
MR. STEIN: Thank you. You know, that part of
your speech got me too.
-------
366
Mrs, J. R. Sherard
(Laughter. )
MRS. SHERARD: We citizens can say it. The hard
workers are in the Health Department and the Conservation
Department.
MB, STEIN: This may be true. I think Mr.
Metzler and I are well known around the country, and I don't
think we have reputations for being pleading enforcers.
Thank you,
MR. METZLER: The next statement is one that I
had moved into the list that I gave you a minute ago,
primarily because it seems to me we should have, at this
point, some reference to the County Sewer Authority plans,
and Mr. E. E. Henkel is here to make that presentation now.
Mr. Henkel.
STATEMENT OP E. E. HENKEL, REPRESENTING
THE SUFFOLK COUNTY SEWER AGENCY
MR. HENKELs Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Conferees, friends of sewage -- and I really hope
that I am speaking truthfully when I say "friends of sewage,"
because if we don't have friends, I don't know when we will
see an end to the pollution problem.
I have a 15-page statement which I will put into
-------
367
E. E. Henkel
the record. It has two or three maps with it, one of which
shows the various districts in the comprehensive sewerage
plan, one showing industrial and the other showing human
waste treatment facilities as they now exist.
MR. STEIN: May I look at the statement and see
if we can incorporate the whole thing in the record?
MR, HENKEL: You may have it. I will be sending
more copies.
MR. STEIN: Right.
MR, HENKEL: Obviously, we are not here to add
more redundant statistics --
MR. STEIN: You meant 5 pages, didn't you?
MR. HENKEL: Yes, but I was having a Joke.
MR. STEIN: All right. We will put the whole
statement in the record, as if read.
MR. HENKEL: We wouldn't burden you with that many
words.
MR. STEIN: All right.
MR. HENKEL: Nor do we want to get into more
opinionated pleading. We are going to make a plea.
Really, listening to the other people here, I
feel that we are littl£ babies, you see.
The Suffolk County Sewer Agency celebrated its
first birthday last week, but it has been and is accomplishing
-------
368
E. E. Henkel
something. It has a fantastically large task.
Mr. Chairman, I could have entered into the
record the study. It is only seven volumes, and it goes
that far (indicating). I couldn't carry it, or I might have
been tempted.
There are several points that I would like to
make. We have the problem of building the sewers and sewage
treatment plants. I think everyone else here has been
telling how necessary this is, but, gentlemen, we have
the Job of doing it. We are assigned the task by the county
of building these things.
Now, this could be fine if we could just go out
and do this, but one thing arises. We must have a public
vote to permit us to do it. This means the public has to
vote to put its hands in its pockets and spend money.
It is not going to be easy to get this type of
approval. I am sure you have heard of the costs of some
of these projects. As the agency charged with doing some-
thing about it, and doing something about it at an expedi-
tious rate, we say we must also consider feasibility, for if
we mandate actions to the public which they will not accept,
we will back where we have been over so many years — all
the years I have lived on Long Island — with regulations
not enforced, and probably because of public opposition,
-------
369
E. E. Henkel
unenforceable.
You heard something earlier — in fact, yesterday
— from Mr. Dennison, about the rate at which the sewerage
systems will be coming eastward, and of studies for the
eastern towns.
I make one point again: This is a good and sound
and comprehensive plan. It will not happen if the public
does not support the referendums which will be coming up
probably early next year.
We have had references to $58 million which the
State has approved just last week for the first sewer
district. This is not money which is given to us. This is
money that is put there contingent upon (a) public approval
in the referendum, and (b) proceeding with the sewer system.
I will close very quickly now, There are many,
many friends out in this audience, people with whom we have
worked. We are going to come up for referendums. We are
going to need the support of the knowledgeable part of the
public, the people who can look beyond the dollars that
will go on their tax bill or their charge for sewer services,
to help get across the very critical importance of this,
and get across to the public too a very important thing:
If we don't do it now, it will cost us more money next year.
Thank you.
-------
370
E. E. Henkel
(The complete prepared statement of Mr. Henkel
is as follows:
The problem of pollutants In the bay, their
extent and sources, is being well covered by other agencies
and citizens groups at this hearing. It is not the intent
of the Suffolk Sewer Agency to pile on redundant statistics,
add to opinionated discourses, or Join in a chorus pointing
fingers of blame. Suffice it to say that the agency, as
an official body constituted by the County Board of Super-
visors and bearing the board's charge to do something con-
structive about the entire pollution problem, recognizes
the conditions in the bay and the merits of the arguments
being presented for corrective action. We are here to add
to the record information about what is being done, what is
planned and, to the degree known at this date, state something
of the time schedule.
In opening, speaking for the agency, I should like
to remind all that if constructive action is to be
accomplished, the problem must be studied with feasibility
— not Just desirability — in mind. Everyone agrees that
it would be nice to have the bay waters under discussion
here and all the rest of our waters, returned to the pristine
state in which our early settlers found them 300 years ago.
It is our hope that eventually we approximate such
-------
371
E. E. Henkel
conditions.
But right now we must deal with conditions as
they are and do our planning on the basis of what truly can
be accomplished. Economics and genuine needs of the
residents of Suffolk County do place some limitations on all
of us dealing with the problem of pure water, be it pure
groundwater for our domestic supply, clean streams and ponds
or an uncontaminated bay. With this in mind, the Suffolk
Sewer Agency — which, incidentally, will celebrate its
first birthday next week -- has been energetically at work
on a comprehensive area which this conference was called to
discuss.
Suffolk County, and local town bodies, have not
been unaware or unconcerned with the dangers posed by
contaminants entering our shore waters. Action is being
taken. Chronologically, some of the more significant steps
leading directly to this action are:
1.	A study by the Suffolk County Department
of Health entitled "Report on Need and Feasibility
for Public Sewage Disposal Facilities in Western
Suffolk County," submitted to the Board of Super-
visors in 1962.
2.	Funding, in August 1963* by State of
New York under Article 12, Section 1263-a of the
-------
372
E. E. Henkel
Public Health Law, of a comprehensive sewage
study for the five western towns encompassing
the county'8 most densely populated areas,
3.	Creation on September 27, 1965# of the
Suffolk County Sewer Agency to carry out a program
leading to sewage systems serving that area, and
eventually, protection of the entire county.
4.	Receipt a few days later (September 30)
of the seven volume first interim report compiled
by the engineering firm which had been engaged
by the County Executive to conduct the State-
funded study.
5.	Determination early this year to proceed
as rapidly as possible with the establishment of
a Disposal District and water pollution control
facility covering Babylon, and parts of Islip,
Smithtown and Huntington. This was found to be
the area where need for a sewage system was most
urgent.
6.	Completion in the very near future (in a
matter of weeks) of the engineer's report on
this district, to be known as Disposal District
1; reports from bonding consultants and other
specialists on the financing methods proposed for
-------
373
E. E. Henkel
the construction and operating coats. These
are essential preliminaries to a public referendum.
7.	Submission of the final plan to the voters
of the district, tentatively scheduled for early
next year.
8.	Beginning of detailed construction plans
early next year. Actual construction probably
under way in a year and a half.
9.	The authorizing of a comprehensive study,
to begin soon, covering the eastern portion of
the county.
It might be significant to point out here that
much of Moriches Bay, all of Long Bay and all of Great
South Bay within the county boundaries are in the area
treated by the studies covering the five western towns.
The largest source of pollutants — speaking
generally and without reference to the localized problem
under consideration -- is waste from residences. With the
continuing increase in population, the amount of waste will
rise almost in direct proportion to the growth in population
and the consequential danger of pollution will increase
commensurately.
While it is very obvious that we will not have
sewers and treatment plants for all of the county on any
-------
37^
E. E. Henkel
immediate basis, the problem is not being neglected in the
intervening period. In close cooperation with the Suffolk
County Health Department, the Suffolk County Sewer Agency
is requiring more carefully treatment of waste on the part
of developers and industry. We firmly believe that we can
slow down the rate at which pollutants are put into our
groundwater, and hence into the streams and bays. Soon we
may be reaching a static point where there is no further
increase in the addition of pollutants. As the sewers are
constructed, we will begin to see an actual reduction of
pollutants entering our groundwater and shore waters.
As you can see from the accompanying maps, which
are made a part of this submission, we are not waiting until
we can get sewers into every area* We can look for a gradual
improvement even earlier to result from our present efforts.
In closing, let me add a few words with regard to the time
scale.
Beverting to my opening discussion, feasibility
is a determining factor. Nothing would be gained by
mandating actions, however desirable, which cannot be
accomplished. We have seen this demonstrated over and over
again. With regard to feasibility, we must take into con-
sideration the economic impact on the resident. If the
burden is so large as to be unbearable, the voter, however
-------
375
E. E. Henkel
sympatheti c to conservation, will tell us he would rather
bear the problems of pollution than the costs of our
programs.
How fast we can proceed will be dependent, to a
degree, on the availability of Federal and State funds. We
are very pleased to report that Just last week the Sewer
Agency received official notice that $58*000,000 has been
committed by the State for District 1. This, of course, is
contingent upon the actual establishment of the district,
which must be approved by the voters.
We will be moving into other districts at an
increasing rate as answers are found to the manifold diffi-
culties inherent in a project as large as the one we are
dealing with. The time at which the anticipated Federal
support is forthcoming will have a strong bearing on the
rate at which we progress.
The Suffolk County Sewer Agency appreciates the
opportunity of participating in this hearing and offers its
full cooperation to all constructive efforts which have as
their objective the preservation of our water resources.)
(The map referred to will be
contained in the files of the
Department as an exhibit.)
-------
376
E. H. Licht
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Henkel.
Are there any questions?
MR. METZLER: I don't believe I have any.
It is a very fine statement, and I particularly
appreciate his reference to the need of intergovernmental
cooperation here in order to solve the problem.
If there are no other questions, I would like to
ask Mr. Emanuel Licht of the Feather Marketing Cooperative
Association, to speak next.
May I suggest to the witnesses who follow, in
order that the last witness has as So°d an audience and
as good a receptivity as the first, and particularly so that
we can ask questions on points that may be of interest to
the conferees, I hope you can keep the statements relatively
short and submit a full written statement to us, where that
is appropriate. Certainly the full statement will be in the
record. I think this may give you the best representation.
MR. STEIN J Thank you.
STATEMENT OP EMANUEL H. LICHT, REPRESENTING
THE FEATHER COOPERATIVE MARKETING ASSOCIATION
MR. LICHT: Mr. Stein, members of the panel:
I got my notice to appear here, in fact, early
-------
E. H. Licht	377
Monday morning, and therefore did not prepare a written
statement, but I will do the best that I can with what
material I have on the subject that I am going to talk about,
and furnish you with a record after this meeting is over.
I will try to dictate a record at my office and mail it
to you.
MR. METZLER: Very good.
MR. LICHT: However, for the meantime, I will
give you two submissions that I have made on the subject
before the Suffolk Board of Supervisors on October 23, 19&1,
and April 16, 1962.
I am going to talk on a subject which has nothing
to do with politics. I can't defend and won't defend
pollution, but I will and I must defend the duck-growing
industry.
I want to take this opportunity to publicly
thank Senator Robert P. Kennedy for helping me get the
Department of Defense to accept all of the available surplus
down and waterfowl feathers that President Kennedy — God
bless his soul -- and President Johnson released from the
General Services Administration's revolving stockpile when
I brought to the attention of the GSA that the Defense
Department was letting contracts for sleeping bags with the
contractor supplying the down. The inquiries on Senator
-------
378
E. H. Licht
Kennedy's part saved the Government millions of dollars.
Since April 30th, more than 3 million pounds left the
stockpile.
Usually, I keep this information confidential,
but they had released it, so I am going to continue the
release. The Government at this time has retained 2 million
pounds of down and 1 million pounds of feathers.
The retention of the down, especially down, con-
clusively proves that it is still considered a strategic
material not replaceable by any other commodity, in spite
of two decades of research and the expenditure of more than
$1 million.
The quantity retained in the stockpile, plus the
domestic production, of which Long Island is the major
source, plus estimated manufacturers' inventory on hand, is
what our Armed Forces must depend upon in the event of
emergency, as they did during two wars.
The supply of this item is so limited that in
both instances, the Government had to freeze all production
to its sole use, and take possession of all inventories in
the hands of manufacturers for the entire duration of two
wars.
I am not going to burden you with figures, but
state that the entire production of the United States would
-------
379
E. H. Licht
give ua about 22 percent of 3 million pounds, or 660,000
pounds of down, of which the Island produces between 65 and
70 percent. It takes about 35 ounces of down and 17 ounces
of feathers for one sleeping bag, and about 45 ounces of
down for an Air Corps emergency kit sleeping bag.
Prior to the Korean Water, the Quartermaster
General's Office was persuaded by my pleading to prepare
sleeping bags. I had asked for this, because I thought that
we were going to get into a row with Russia. They were in
production of 217,000 bags, when the retreat during the
terrible winter weather took place at Korea. These bags
saved the lives of tens of thousands of our men, and pre-
vented thousands of amputations because of freezing.
The major portion of those bags was filled with
the product of the duck farms of Long Island, because we
had guaranteed to supply to the manufacturers or manu-
facturer who would get the contract. We did not renege on
our obligations.
Mobilization or emergency planning depends on us,
and if, God forbid, we are called upon, we will serve as we
did before.
To make sure that the statements that I make
cannot be refuted, I have asked various Departments of
the Government at this very late date by wire to back me
-------
380
E. H. Licht •
up, whether this situation is still imminent -- in other
words, whether this is a critical item. The General
Services Administration advised me Monday morning that it is.
So that you can go ahead and dream of your pleasures.
In your affluent society, I note that there are always
worriers like myself to take care of possible trouble before
it happens. I did so in 19^6 and 19^7# find we were ready
for Korea.
The Times on September 19th on Page 2 states that
President Eisenhower said that he was prepared to act
against China with limited nuclear warheads. This meant
going northward. That calls for sleeping bags. He referred
to our allies in NATO, urging find wanting him to be ready to
act in some way* and in sticky situations we should use
nuclear weapons. That means escalate northward.
Rest easy. The worriers are preparing, so we need
down and must preserve the long Island duck supply.
On August 12th, the Journal of Commerce had an
item concerning this matter, which finally tied up the whole
situation and leaves ua with the problem —
MR. METZLER: Mr. Licht, may I interrupt you at
this point?
MR. LICHT: Yes,
MR. METZLER: I think that the conferees would
-------
381
E. H. Licht
agree with your point here that feathers and down are a
critical item.
MR, LICHT: Yes.
MR, METZLER: And we would be glad to have the
documentation which you have offered here.
It seems to me that if you have some other points
to make, I wish you would proceed to make them. If not, I
for one, and you have me convinced, and I hope you might —
MR, LICHT: No, no.
MR. METZLER: I don't think you need any more
documentation.
MR. LICHT: One more point.
If there were no Long Island duck raising industry,
we would have to create one, because this is something that
research and development has not been able to answer for
over twenty years. It seems that that little bud on the
undercoating of a duck known as down cannot be duplicated
by any method of making fibers.
The reason why this is so necessary, this material,
is that it can be compressed, can be used for the purpose
needed, namely, to shelter the soldier under the conditions
that I outlined, and we have to back up the Long Island
duck raiser, and, as Senator Kennedy proposed, clear up the
-------
382
E. H. Licht
pollution.-- and you nren are in the position to do it — so
that we can preserve this industry.
MR. METZLER: Well, I think you have made this
point very well.
You started off by saying you would not apologize
for pollution from the industry.
MR. LICHT: No.
MR. METZLER: And I say to you that the reason
for this conference and what will grow out of it is to find
out how this industry can live in the environment where it
is, so we are all looking for a common goal.
We are not trying to chase an industry out of
New York State, but I would say the same thing « I am
speaking now for the Pure Waters Program of the State of
New York — I would say the same thing to this industry that
I told the pulp and paper manufacturers last week. They
will have to clean up, and if that is the gist of your
testimony, I couldn't agree with you more heartily.
MR. LICHT: Yes, but there is one thing that must
be definitely known, that we can't take the judgment of a
Mr. Dennison and say they have got to get out. They don't
have to get out.
There are more important things that we have to
take care of, and that is solve the problem of pollution and
-------
383
E. H. LIcht
let them stay here.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
MR. LICHT: Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Licht.
You know, I myself am delighted, after spending
at least a quarter of a century in Washington, finally to
meet a genuine, honest-to-goodness feather merchant.
(Laughter.)
MR. METZLER: Well, my education has increased
a great deal this morning. I am appreciative to you,
Mr. Licht, for giving me some of this background, which,
frankly, is completely foreign to my previous experience.
(The documents referred to by
Mr. Licht will be contained
in the files of the Department
as exhibits.)
MR. METZLER: The next witness for the State of
New York is Mr. Nelson D. Houck, the General Manager of the
Long Island Duck Farmers Cooperative.
Mr. Hbuck,
STATEMENT OP NELSON D. HOUCK, GENERAL
MANAGER, LONG ISLAND DUCK FARMERS
COOPERATIVE, INC.
-------
384
N. D. Hbuck
MR. HOUCK: Mr. Chairman, conferees, ladies and
gentlemen:
My name is Nelson Houck and I am General Manager
of the Long Island Duck Farmers Cooperative, Inc. At this
hearing I represent all of the duck growers on Long Island,
which grow approximately 7>500,000 ducklings per year. I#ng
Island ducklings have been an industry for close to 100 years.
Our industry has recognized that part of the
problem of pollution in our area which has come from the
duck industry. Corrective steps that have been taken so far
include the removal of ducks from the open natural waters
and the effort to remove settleable solids by the use of
lagoon systems on the individual farms. We found this does
not solve the complete problem of pollution. We now know
that secondary treatment and chlorination are required.
To determine how this secondary treatment could be effectively
handled, Suffolk County and the duck industry employed the
Coauiich Company, an engineering firm, to conduct sampling
programs, laboratory treatability studies, and to design a
demonstration pilot plant for the treatment of the duck
effluent.
As a result of these studies, a pilot plant was
designed. A sit* has Men selected, constructIon has
started, and It is expected that the plant will toe completed
-------
385
N. D. Houck
in one month. We believe that answers to the problem of
secondary treatment will come from this plant. Reasonable
time-tables for the solution of the problem have been
established with the local and State health departments.
The time, as well as the cooperation and the aid of local,
State and Federal government is needed.
We must solve this problem, as the long Island
duck industry is basic to Suffolk County. The estimated
total worth of the industry is over $30 million. More than
$15 million of new money is brought into the county annually,
and, of course, is handled over and over again. An esti-
mated 1,500 unskilled and semi-skilled employees earn their
livelihood in the duck industry. The effect of these
factors should be considered before we talk of eliminating
an Industry, as was suggested here yesterday. Rather than
eliminating any industries, we must save both the duck and
the shellfish industries. We ask for technical and financial
help from local, State and Federal government to this end.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, sir.
I wonder if you can help us very much by answering
these questions.
Do I understand that you said a reasonable time
schedule has been established by the State Health Department
and the local departments? In other words, in the opinion
-------
386
N. D. Houck
of the industry, you think the requirements of the schedule
given to you, as outlined in the orders of the New York
State Health Department by Mr. Hennigan yesterday, are
reasonable, as far as you are concerned?
MR. HOUCK: Well, we have already gotten started
a bit late on the pilot plant, so we will have this
problem, but, on the other hand, our intention is to find
out what will happen in the pilot plant. We are hoping
that we will not find too many bugs in it. We are hoping
*
that we will find solutions that can be used much more
broadly and with a combination of farms or tying in, as has
been mentioned here, with metropolitan areas.
MR. STEIN: Let me rephrase the question.
You say reasonable time-tables for solution of
the problems have been established with local and State
health departments.
I listened with interest to what Mr. Robert
Hennigan of the New York State Health Department said yester-
day. He had time schedules for abatement of pollution from
the duck farms, and specific, requirements of what is needed,
and this is substantially secondary treatment and chlorination.
Are you in agreement with the views of the Health
Department on this?
MR. HOUCK; I will restate what I said, and that
-------
3b7
N. D. Houck
is that assuming that the pilot plant develops like we
expect, they could be reasonable time schedules. Until we
know what comes out of the pilot plant, it is Impossible to
make a definite statement.
MR. STEIN: All right. Thank you.
MR. METZLER: There are some things, on the other
hand, that you can be doing at this stage, Mr. Houck, or,
that is, your members can be doing.
As in any other industry, there is a great deal
of clean-up, reduction of water usage, and so forth, all of
these factors in the pollution abatement business.
Are your members aware of this, and what kind of
steps are you taking to be sure that they are moving to
reduce their waste load as much as they can, even before
treatment?
MR, HOUCK: Well, our communication has been good,
and I am sure they are all aware of the acuteness of this
problem; and the industry voluntarily, something over a
year ago, employed a man to go around to each duck farm
each week to make sure that all regulations were being
complied with and the lagoon systems were working and the
effluent was going out into streams as well as they could
do without secondary treatment.
MR. METZLER: There is one other matter, not only
-------
388
N. D. Houck
this pilot plant, but for the benefit of the conferees I
would like to mention that prior to the actual calling of
this hearing, New York was aware that this was a problem,
and I had a feeling that perhaps someone who knew nothing
about ducks, but knew something about some other kinds of
waste treatment problems, might be helpful.
The State Health Department had assembled a couple
of consultants for study. I realize again this is a problem
that everyone and his brother has studied, but they have
been here on their first visit, and their preliminary
report offered some other possibilities other than those
now under consideration.
We will be working with you very closely, not only
in connection with financing and the operation of the pilot
plant, but in exploring the ideas which this committee has
developed.
MR. HOUCK: We appreciate any help you have.
MR. KLASHMAN: There are two questions that I would
like to ask.
First, it is my understanding that there are one
or two due* farms that are currently treating their wastes
effectively. In other words, what they are doing, as I
i.*»i 4t1 wastes and then using
understand it, is settling their
j	nfpriiizing the effluent. X
aerated lagoons, and then sterin* ts
-------
389
N. D. Houck
understand this Is effective.
Why can't the other farms do the same thing?
MR. HOUCK: Well, this all came about through
Mr. Cosulich's study, and it has been started. As soon as
we can get through this pilot plant and assure ourselves of
not only the aeration, but the secondary treatment which we
-- a year ago, we, in conjunction with Cornell University,
had a test on a farm in the East port area In regard to
chlorination, and this, we hope, will be incorporated in
this pilot plant. There we learned a number of things,
and in the laboratories they have learned a number of
things. Each one of these will add to our total.
As you mentioned, aeration has taken place on one
farm, but I doubt whether any large amount of secondary
treatment has taken place,
MR. METZLER: I am not quite sure I understood
you. Did you mean that in connection with this specific
installation you weren't sure that it was actually providing
secondary treatment?
MR. HOUCK; In what he refers to, the farm.
MR. METZLER: Well, this is the one with the
lagoons and the three 15 horsepower aerators?
MR. HOUCK: Right.
MR. METZLER: Well, you are aware of the studies
-------
390
N. D. Houck
which we have made of this in the stream below, and that
actually it is providing quite a high degree of secondary
treatment.
MR. KLASHMAN: Then why do we need studies? What
I don't understand is, if we have an installation that is
working, why do we have to have more studies?
Why can't the farms just go ahead and put in
installations that are very similar?
MR. HOUCK: I think in the next report here, Bill
Cosulich's report will bring that out and clear it up for
you. He is going to talk here, our engineer.
MR. KLASHMAN: I can appreciate your wanting
professional engineering guidance here.
The other question that I would like to ask is,
is any thought being given to utilizing, if you do need
actually a pilot plant, which, frankly, I don't see at this
point, but I am sure Mr. Cosulich's report will clarify that
-- if you do indeed need a pilot plant, has any thought been
given to utilizing the plant which has actually been built
with Federal funds, and is now standing idle, to help the
other duck farms? Has any thought been given to this?
MR, HOUCK: I am not acquainted well enough to
answer your question.
MR. KLASHMAN: I would strongly recommend that
-------
391
N. D. Houck
thought be given to saving you money, and the State money,
and perhaps utilizing this thing as a pilot plant.
MR. HOUCK: Well, each one of these things cer-
tainly should be looked into; there is no question.
MR. KLASHMAN: It seems to me that in order to
meet the State's deadline, action, of course, has to be
taken immediately.
MR. HOUCK: Right.
MR. KLASHMAN: I hope you are able to.
MR. STEIN: Why isn't that plant working? Do you
know, Mr. Houck?
MR. HOUCK: No, I don't.
MR. KLASHMAN: Thank you very much.
MR, METZLER: Thank you. I think this is helpful.
May I change my mind in the order in which I am
calling witnesses, for it seems to me that you have just
opened the road for Mr, Cosulich. Perhaps, rather than
putting him on at the end, this might be an appropriate time
for him.
I hope those others of you who are shoved back
one notch by this won't feel offended by it. I hope it will
help.
Mr. William Cosulich is the consulting engineer,
and he is from Syosset, New York.
-------
W. F. Cosulich
392
STATEMENT OP WILLIAM P. COSULICH, CONSULTING
ENGINEER, SYOSSET, NEW YORK
MR. COSULICH: I would just like to describe the
present pollution abatement program of the duck farmers,
and briefly describe the pilot plant.
In 1965, Suffolk County and the duck growers
Jointly sponsored a laboratory scale study to determine a
more suitable method of treating duck wastes. The study
was aimed at methods of treatment that would effectively
reduce organic pollution, nutrients and bacterial numbers.
Both chemical and biological treatment processes were
investigated.
Based on the results of the laboratory studies and
cost studies, it was determined that the most suitable
method of treating duck wastes is by means of aerated lagoons.
To confirm the results of the laboratory study,
and to work out practical design details, a 50,000-gallon-
per-day pilot scale aerated lagoon is being constructed at
the DePiazzy farm in Moriches. The construction of the
project is being financed entirely by the duck growers. The
pilot plant is expected to be in opetffttion in three to four
weeks.
-------
393
W. F. Cosulich
A brief description of the pilot plant is a3
follows:
Fifty thousand gallons per day of duck wastes
will be pumped to a 250,000-gallon aerated lagoon equipped
with a 5 horsepower aerator. Microorganisms in the lagoon,
which live on organic waste material, will effectively
reduce the oxygen demand of the waste and convert the
organic nitrogen to ammonia and nitrates.
Lime and calcium chloride will be added to the
lagoon to precipitate phosphates.
The liquid effluent will be disinfected with
chlorine, prior to discharge to Swift Stream.
The plant is expected to remove at least 90 percent
of the solids, biochemical oxygen demand and phosphates from
the wastes. Chlorination will control bacterial numbers to
meet Health Department standards.
After several months' testing of the performance of
the lagoon, plans will be prepared for full-scale waste
treatment facilities. By April 30, 1968, all duck wastes
on Long Island will be provided with effective waste treat-
ment facilities.
MR. STEIN: As I read your statement, you believe
that with this you can comply with the New York State order?
MR. COSULICH: Yes. Dwight Metzler knows,
-------
394
W. P. Cosulich
aerated lagoons are not anything new. They have been using
them extensively in the food processing industry and other
industries.
We know it will work. It is just a matter of how
well it will work, and working out some of the practical
design details. We are not afraid that we are starting out
with something entirely new.
MR. STEIN: No. I wanted to say this to Mr. Houck
before.
The conclusions that you have arrived at in the
duck industry are the same conclusions, I think, that a lot
of the other industries, not only in food processing, but
the sugar beet industry and the pulp and paper industry, are
arriving at the same way, because they have, in a large
manner, the same problem in dealing with organic wastes.
Just putting them in a lagoon and discharging won't do the
job, and something like this is needed.
However, let me ask you this: When you talk about
50,000 gallons per day of duck wastes, you don't mean of
wastes. You mean water, don't you?
MR. COSULICH: Water. Yes.
MR. STEIN: Well, how much water will you be
treating when you say by April 30> 1968, all of it? How
many gallons do you anticipate will be under treatment
-------
395
W. F. Cosulich
by then?
MR. COSULICH: Well, just say we can get all the
duck farmers to decrease their water uses. Most of them
use too much water now. The first thing you have to do is
educate them to using less water.
Assuming 10 gallons per duck — it doesn't work
out that way — there are, I think, 3-£ million ducks per
year grown in the Moriches area, but they are not all on
the farm the whole summer. I forget how many crops they
have over a summer, so there is a little arithmetic you have
to do, but if I can do a little arithmetic —
MR. STEIN: Yes, We Just want to get the magnitude
of the number of gallons of water you are going to use,
because that may affect the thinking here.
MR. COSULICH: It is around 556,000 ducks times 10.
MR. STEIN: Five million gallons?
MR. COSULICH: Five million.
MR. STEIN: All right. Now, on what do you base
your notion that you are going to get rid of 90 percent of
the phosphates?
MR. COSULICH: In the laboratory studies, by
adjusting the pH and the ratio of calcium salts to phosphates
of two to one, we got a 90 percent reduction, just by
shoveling it right into the aerated lagoon.
-------
396
W. F. Cosulich
This may not work as well In the field, but we
are hopeful. We will do as good a job as possible.
MR, STEIN: I know, but this is a critical point.
If we are talking in terms of phosphates, I want
to make this point, I know if you adjust the pH, you can
get it, but this is the kind of operation that takes due
care.
You know, if you can adjust the pH in swimming
pools, you will have pretty clear swimming pools around
here. Yet, if you go up and down and just look at your
motels, you can see how well they have made that adjustment.
The difficulty is that that adjustment is made,
and this is the kind of process we are using here. We are
not going to get a reduction in the critical item, which
is something that I think we have to recognize. This is
one of the problems when we are dealing with chemical
treatments.
Uhless we are working under conditions that can
produce this, the operation can change drastically. Unless
run at optimum capacity, we are not going to get the reduc-
tion, because again, you figure the number of ducks you have
-- and even If you take away 90 percent of the phosphates,
the 10 percent that 1b left is not inconsiderable. We should
keep that to the irreducible minimum.
-------
397
W. P. Cosullch
MR. COSULICH: May I bring out just two points?
Listening to Dave Wallace yesterday, I am
wondering whether some of these nutrients don't do the
clams at least some good. He said that last year they got
their biggest crop, so maybe a little bit of nutrients does
help.
MR. STEIN: Don't do that.
(Laughter.)
You know, at one time people who were working
with nuclear energy claimed that a bottle of aspirin was
more dangerous, and they got into trouble.
Some of the detergent manufacturers told us we
could use the detergents to trace pollution. I don't think
the public reacted to that.
I think we should concentrate on keeping the
phosphates out.
MR. COSULICH; Okay.
One other thing: I would like to answer Mr.
Klashman's question when he wondered about the need for
this pilot plant.
We made a survey of the various duck farms this
spring to pick a farm for the pilot plant. The Corwln
farm had a very large lagoon, which he chose on his own
to put three mechanical aerators on. However, this is not a
-------
398
W, P. Cosulich
typical farm. He has an eviscerating plant, and he pre-
aettles his wastes.
We wanted to pick a farm where we could set up
this thing the way we thought this aerator lagoon should
work, where we did not have presettling, where all the
sludge would go through the aeration tank and be stablized,
so that we would have a minimum amount of sludge to handle
at the end of the process, and also a stabilized sludge.
This is why we are putting up an engineered pilot
plant in Moriches, rather than using this one aerated plant
in the Corwln farm.
MR. KLASHMAN: Thank you. You have partially
answered my question.
May I ask another question? I notice that you dp
have a date. You say in your statement tlnat by April 30,
1968, all the duck farms will actually have the wastes under
control.
Could you give me some idea, or could you give
us some idea of how you are going to meet the rest of the
State schedule?
MR. COSULICH: Let me say this --
MR. KLASHMAN: Go ahead.
MR, COSULICH: The duck people themselves and the
Health Department have not worked out some of these details.
-------
399
W. P. Cosulich
We are going to have to sit down and work it out.
We want to see if there is any possibility of
getting the towns or the county to cooperate as far as
forming a district. The mechanics of this haven't all been
worked out yet.
MR. KLASHMAN: Thank you very much.
MR. COSULICH: All right.
MR. STEIN: Thank you very much for your statement,
I think, and I say this advisedly, with an
approach as we have had from the duck farmers and their
engineers, I am satisfied that we can hit this problem.
This is something that reasonable men can solve and settle,
and I am very much encouraged after the testimony of the
last two speakers.
Now a word about procedure.
We are going to try to go through until we hear
all the people. After that, we will recess shortly, when
the conferees will go into the rear room, and we will then
come out and make an announcement.
I think I have a fairly good sense of this. I
think we will be able to come out very shortly and make an
announcement. Sometimes the conferees have to retire for
the day, like a jury, but the situation is developing here
so that I am pretty sure I can sense the consensus.
-------
400
M. Barbash
How many more people do you have?
MR. METZLER: Six.
MR. STEIN: If you will all cooperate, we should
have you out of here pretty soon.
Mr. Metzler?
MR. METZLER: Thank you, Mr. Stein.
Maurice Barbash, Chairman of the Citizens'
Committee for the Fire Island National Seashore, is the next
witness.
STATEMENT OP MARUICE BARBASH, CITIZENS'
COMMITTEE FOR THE FIRE ISLAND NATIONAL
SEASHORE
MR, BARBASH: Conferees and Mr, Chairman:
I am not going to attempt, after a day and a half
of all of us listening to this testimony, to add any knowledge
to the complexity of the situation in Great South Bay other
than to say it is obvious, like the Musicman said, "We got
trouble, terrible, terrible trouble, and it starts with "t"
and it rhymes with "p," but this time it is not "pool" that
is causing the trouble. It is pollution. This morning it
was almost politics for a while,
(Laughter.)
-------
401
M. Barbash
However, I think it Is perfectly clear that we
are dealing with a very complex situation, a delicate
ecologically balanced mechanism here in Great South Bay.
The problems are many and varied.
Unfortunately, the solutions that people propose
sometimes are unilateral solutions -- open up an inlet here,
an inlet there. Naturally, cleaning up and preventing the
pollution from the duck farms is going to help considerably,
but, as the Senator and others have pointed out, there are
many, many problems, and possibly many, many solutions. We
have to get, once and for all, if we are going to get any
place here, a complete picture of what we have on the south
shore of Long Island and Great South Bay and Moriches Bay.
Now, one of the greatest impediments that we have
found to progress in solving this problem of keeping these
waters clean is the numerous multiple overlapping juris-
dictions which we find in Great South Bay. We have the
towns that border the bay, Babylon, Islip, Brookhaven,
Southampton, with their jurisdictional rights. We have the
county, the County Department of Health, the County Public
Works Department, with rights and jurisdictions in the bay.
We have the State of New York, with the Long Island State
Park Commission, the State Health Department, and the Depart-
ment of Public Works, and now we have the national government
-------
M 02
M. Barbash
with the Fire Island National Seashore, and also the Army
Corps of Engineers, the Coast Guard. We are never going
to solve the problem of keeping the Great South Bay in
proper ecological balance for its multiple uses, unless we
get all of these Jurisdictions together.
Now, we have worked long enough with the govern-
ment, since 1962, in our effort to create the Fire Island
National Seashore, to realize that it is hard enough to get
two agencies within the same Department to work together.
It seems an almost Impossible task to get all of these
agencies on all levels of government together, but it can be
done, because it has to be done, very simply.
What we propose is a merger of these overlapping
jurisdictions into — well, I guess you would call that a
vertical combination. You could call the body the Great
South Bay Conservation Commission.
We think this Commission should be weighted in
favor of the local people to give them primary responsi-
bility as they wish to exercise. We think it should include
members of the State who have jurisdiction, and the Federal
Government.
I am submitting our proposal for the record, Mr.
Chairman.
MR. STEIN: Without objection, it will be
incorporated in the record as if read.
-------
M. Barbash	^03
(The document referred to is as follows;
GREAT SOUTH BAY CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Chapter 1. Findings and Declaration of Policy
1. The Legislature hereby finds and declares
that the public interest in the Great South Bay is in its
beneficial use for a variety of purposes; that the public
has an interest in the Bay as one of the most valuable
natural resources of an entire region, a resource that gives
special character to the Bay area; that the Bay is a single
body of water that can be used for many purposes, from
conservation to planned development; and that the Bay
operates as a delicate physical mechanism in which changes
that affect one part of the Bay may also affect all other
parts; and that it is a natural unit of rare and important
values that should be preserved for itself and especially
because of its initimate relationships with the Fire Island
National Seashore. It is, therefore, declared to be in the
public and home rule interest to create a politically-
responsible, democratic process and mechanism of inter-
governmental cooperation by which the Great South Bay and
its wetlands, bay bottoms, estuaries, marine environment
and shoreline can be analyzed, planned, regulated and
-------
404
M. Barbash
preserved as a unit.
2. The Legislature further finds and declares
that the present manner in which the Great South Bay is
being polluted, filled, used and altered threatens the Bay
and its marine environment, and is, therefore, Inimical
to the welfare of both present and future users and residents
of the area surrounding the Bay; that while some individual
projects and uses which affect the Bay resource may be
necessary and desirable for the needs of the entire Bay
Region, the fact remains that existing governmental
mechanisms are not comprehensively coordinated to evaluate
Individual projects as to their total impact and effect on
the entire Bay; and that further piecemeal filling, dredging,
alteration, and uncoordinated use thereof may destroy the
irreplaceable feeding and breeding grounds of fish, shell-
fish and wildlife in the Bay, may adversely affect the
ecological balance of the Bay resource and quality of Bay
waters, and would, therefore, be harmful to the needs of the
present and future population and users of the Bay region,
and may be detrimental to the use and enjoyment of the Fire
Island National Seashore by the public*
3. The Legislature further finds and declares
that in order to protect the public interest in the Great
South Bay, a new approach involving intergovernmenta1
-------
405
M. Barbash
cooperation between Federal, State and local governments
is necessary, to be carried out by the Great South Bay
Conservation Commission created by this act and comprised
of representatives of Federal, State and local government,
and the general public; that this approach, treating the
entire Bay as a unit, should begin with a detailed study of
all the characteristics of the Bay resource, including its
conservation and recreation values, the quality, quantity
and movement of Bay waters, the ecological balance of the
Bay, and the economic interests in the Bay, including the
economic needs of the users of the Bay; that the study
should examine all present and proposed users of the Bay
resource and its shoreline, and should give consideration
to such master plans as have been or may be adopted by the
towns and villages adjacent to the Bay or by any govern-
mental entity doing planning for the Bay; and that the study
should, without duplicating existing planning work relevant
to the Great South Bay, lead to a comprehensive and
enforceable master plan for the conservation of the Bay
resource, its marine environment and shoreline.
4. The Legislature further finds and declares
that in order, during the period of study leading to the
comprehensive conservation plan referred to in Section 3
and until all hearings thereon have been concluded, to
-------
bo6
M. Barbash
proteot the present shoreline and body of the Great South
Bay, its wetlands, bay bottoms* and marine environment,
to the maximum extent possible, it is essential that
the Commission be empowered, during such period, to
issue or deny permits, after public hearings, for any
proposed project, prior written notice of which shall be
given to the Commission, that involves placing fill in the
Bay or extracting submerged materials from the Bay,
dredging or other public worlcs or private projects that
would have an adverse effect upon the Bay resource; the
exercise of the powers by the Commission shall be judicially
re vie viable. The powers of the Commission shall be in addi-
tion to and not a substitute for those of local zoning
bodies, units of government, or town trustees of Bay
bottoms and submerged lands.
Chapter 2. Definition of Great South Bay
5, For the purposes of this title, the Great
South Bay is defined as the inland waters from the western
boundary line of the Town of Babylon, eastward to the
eastern boundary line of the Town of BrooVchaven, including
the waters of Great South Bay, Fire Island Inlet, and
-------
407
M. Barbash
their tributaries, and includes its islands, and all
adjacent wetlands, marshlands, tidelands, and submerged
lands which are subject to tidal action, and the Bay
bottom, itself, and all estuaries, creeks and canals
which drain or empty into the Bay, and its shoreline as
outlined in the map attached.
The definition of Great South Bay which is
made by this section is merely for the purpose of pre-
scribing the authority of the Commission which Is created
by this title. This definition shall not be construed to
affect title to any land or to prescribe the boundaries of
the Great South Bay for any purpose except the authority of
the Commission created by this title. This definition of
Great South Bay shall not preclude the Commission from
studying the entire Great South Bay as an ecological unit.
Chapter 3. Great South Bay Conservation Commission
6. The Great South Bay Conservation Commission
is hereby created. The Commission shall consist of members
appointed as follows:
a)	One representative of the Department of Interior
appointed by the Secretary of the Interior.
b)	One representative of the Department of Housing
and Urban Development appointed by the Secretary
of Housing and Urban Affairs,
-------
408
M. Barbash
One representative of the United States Army
Corps of Engineers, appointed by the Division
Engineer, United States Army Engineers.
One representative of the United States Coast
Guard, appointed by the Seoretary of the Treasury,
One representative of the New York State
Conservation Department appointed by the Governor.
One representative of the State Health Department
appointed by the Governor,
One representative of the New York State
Department of Public Works appointed by the
Governor.
One representative of the Long Island State
Park Commission appointed by the Governor.
One representative of the Suffolk County Sewer
Agenoy appointed by the County Executive, with
the advice and consent of the Suffolk County
Board of Supervisors.
One representative of the Suffolk County Health
Department appointed by the County Exeoufcive
with the advice and consent of the Suffolk
County Board of Supervisors.
One representative of the Suffolk County Depart-
ment of Public Works appointed by the County
-------
409
M, Barbash
Executive with the advice and consent of the Suffolk
County Board of Supervisors.
Two representatives of the Town of Babylon, one
of whom shall represent the villages adjacent
to the Great South Bay, appointed by the Super-
visor with the advice and consent of the Town
Board.
Two representatives of the Town of Brookhaven, one
of whom shall represent the villages adjacent to
the Great South Bay, appointed by the Supervisor
with the advice and consent of the Town Board.
Two representatives of the Town of Islip, one of
whom shall represent the villages adjacent to
the Great South Bay, appointed by the Supervisor
with the advice and consent of the Town Board.
One representative of the Town of Smithtown,
appointed by the Supervisor with the advice and
consent of the Town Board.
One representative of the Town of Huntington,
appointed by the Supervisor with the advice and
oonsent of the Town Board.
One representative of the Town of Southampton,
appointed by the Supervisor with the advice and
consent of the Town Board.
-------
410
M. Barbash
r) One representative of the Town of Southold,
appointed by the Supervisor with the advice
and consent of the Town Board,
s) One representative of the Town of Easthampton,
appointed by the Supervisor with the advice and
consent of the Town Board,
t) One representative of the Town of Shelter Island,
appointed by the Supervisor with the advice and
consent of the Town Board,
u) One representative of the Town of Riverhead,
appointed by the Supervisor with the advice and
consent of the Town Board«
v) Three members of the publlo at large, who are
residents of Suffolk: County, other than public
officials, appointed by the Suffolk County Board
of Supervisors.
7. The members of the Commission Bhall serve
for such terms as may be specified by their respective
appointing powers. The members shall serve without compensa-
tion, but each of the members shall be reimbursed for his
neoessary expenses inourred in the performance of his
duties, except those members who are employed by Federal,
State or' local agencies and who are reimbursed for their
expenses by their respective agenoies.
-------
411
M. Barbash
8.	(a) The Suffolk County Board of Supervisors
shall select, from among representatives on the Commission
of the public at large, appointed pursuant to Section 6, a
chairman and a vice chairman, who shall not be representatives
of any governmental body.
(b)	The Commission may elect such other
officials as may be necessary to carry out its business.
(c)	No member of the Commission, who is
otherwise a public official or employee, shall suffer forfeiture
of his office or employment, or any loss or diminution in
the rights and privileges appertaining thereto, by reason
of membership on the Commission.
(d)	liach member shall be entitled to one
vote on all matters which may come before the Commission.
9.	The time and place of the first meeting of
the Commission shall be prescribed by the Board of Super-
visors of Suffolk County, but in no event shall it be scheduled
for a date later than 60 days after the effective date of
this title.
10, The headquarters of the Commission shall be
in the County of Suffolk.
Chapter 4. Powers and Duties of the Commission
-------
412
M. Barbash
11. In carrying out its purposes, the Commis-
sion shall provide the leadership in developing a coordinative,
comprehensive plan Incorporating the best thinking of Federal,
State, and local governmental and private plans, and it shall
encourage and assist public and private agencies and persons
to undertake projects and activities in accordance with the
coordinative comprehensive plan. The Commission shall cause
to be made a detailed study of all matters referred to in
Section 3, including, but not limited to, the following:
A.	Library Research
a)	compile and analyze all available results of
studies made to date on oceanography, biology,
social, and eoonomio studies of the area as
basis to fill in gaps in knowledge needed.
b)	prepare comprehensive bibliography from
this material for future referenoe.
B,	Geographical and BloloKioal Studies
a)	delineate and plot all major ecological
zones and their current conditions including
areas dredged or filled«
b)	locate and chart all wildlifet shellfish,
fin fiBh habitats for all major speoies.
c)	Locate and chart seasonal distribution of
eelgrass and marine alga© including main
macro and raioro speoies.
-------
413
M. Barbash
d) locate and plot bottom types and character-
istics.
C.	Qceanographic Studies
a)	Current studies and seasonal distribution of
salinity, nitrate, phosphate and other key
chemical constituents in water.
b)	Degree of sewage and industrial pollution,
sources, and their distribution.
c)	Remap bottom topography.
D.	Current Uses
Recreation and Commercial Utilization
a)	Pish and Shellfish
b)	Hunting - waterfowl and rails
c)	Boating - private and commercial
d)	Swimming and other water recreation
e)	Aesthetic - bird-watching, nature study, other
E.	Legislative Studies
a)	Existing legislation
b)	Recommended new legislation
and shall, upon the basis of such study, prepare a compre-
hensive and enforceable plan for the conservation and develop-
ment of the Great South Bay resource.
12, In making its study, the Commission shall
cooperate to the fullest extent possible with all Federal
-------
414
M. Barbash
State and local agencies and governments; and In preparing
its comprehensive plan, the Commission shall, to the fullest
extent possible, coordinate its planning for the Bay with
planning for the land area surrounding the Bay by local
agencies, which shall retain the responsibility for land
use planning. In order to avoid duplication of work, the
Commission shall make maximum use of data and information
available from the planning departments and programs of
Federal, State and local agencies and governments, and other
public and private planning agencies, the Advisory Commission
on Intergovernmental Relations, and the New York State Office
of Local Government, and the various governments represented
on the Commission shall cooperate to the fullest extent
possible in making personnel available directly to the
Commission.
13. The.master plan which results from the study and
action of the Commission shall, among other things, contain
the following elements:
a)	Ways and means of conserving, protecting
and wisely using the Bay and its natural
resources.
b)	Methods of conserving, protecting and
propagating the fish, shellfish and wildlife
(including migratory birds which use such
-------
415
M. Barbash
area as their habitat, or for resting,
feeding and spawning.)
Ways and means of preserving the ecological
balance of the Bay resource.
Ways and means of preventing, controlling
and abating pollution of the Bay and
encroachment of incompatible development
and projects upon the Bay resource.
Recommended public acquisitions for con-
servation and recreation purposes.
Ways and means of developing and managing the
Bay resource as a natural, economic and
recreational asset, giving priority to
conservation and recreation purposes.
Ways and means of strengthening and
implementing the purposes of the Long Island
Wetlands Act and all cooperative agreements
thereunder and of all other existing Federal,
State and local legislation designed to
protect the Bay resource.
The feasibility of inlet and channel
dredging as a means of combating Bay
pollution, bearing in mind the necessity of
-------
416
M. Barbash
avoiding the unnecessary destruction of
Bay bottom, wetlands, shellfish and other
natural resources of the Bay.
The feasibility of the Great South Bay
resource as a site for oceanographic and
other marine studies.
The formulation of programs which will
qualify for assistance from Federal and
State governments in planning, development,
administration and use of the Bay and related
resources, including, but not limited to, the
following:
Water Quality Act of 1965
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act
Water Resources Act
Water Resources Planning Act - Federal
and State
Flood Control and Rivers and Harbors Act
Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965
Commercial Fisheries Research and Develop-
ment Act of 1964
New York State Pure Waters Program
Fire Island National Seashore Act of 1964
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
-------
417
M. Barbash
Identification of the values and users of
the Bay resource, the extent to which they
conflict, the ways and means of eliminating
or preventing conflict, the establishment
of preferred benefits and priorities where
conflicting use is unavoidable.
The formulation of a formal intergovernmental
agreement concerning management and administra^
tion of the Great South Bay natural resource,
which shall include appropriate Federal,
State and local governments as parties, and
which plan shall set forth the means of its
implementation, enforcement, and continuing
review and amendment, in the light of changing
conditions or circumstances, and which plan
will be so drawn as to serve as a demonstra-
tion project of cooperation between Federal,
State and local governments in the solution
of natural resource problems similar to that
presented by the Great South Bay resource.
The plan shall identify those areas of the
Great South Bay, its wetlands, Bay bottoms
and marine environment, which are already
protected by public ownership, management or
-------
418
M. Barbash
control. Nothing In the plan shall effect
a transfer of title to such protected lands
or waters, without the consent of their
owners.
14. The master plan shall consist of a map and
a statement describing it and a statement covering the
objectives, principles and standards used to develop it.
a)	The Commission shall prepare this master
plan within 2 years from the effective date
of this act.
b)	Once the plan has been prepared, reasonable
public notice shall be given concerning its
proposals, and public hearings shall be held
in Suffolk County and in each of the towns
adjacent to the Bay, prior to the adoption
of the plan by the Commission.
c)	The Commission shall adopt its plan within
3 months following the date of the final
public hearing, which final hearing shall take
place not later than 30 months from the
effective date of this act.
d)	Upon adoption of the master plan, the Commis-
sion shall issue a public statement with
suitable publicity thereto, including
-------
419
M. Barbash
publication in at least two newspapers of
daily circulation of Suffolk County, of the
contents of the plan and Its reasons for
adopting same.
Within 15 days after its adoption of the
master plan, the Commission shall submit a
copy of such plan to each of the authorities
who have appointed representatives to the
Commission. Each of the towns shall be
required to hold public hearings on such
plan after reasonable notice thereof to the
population of each of said units of government,
the first of such public hearings to be held
no later than 30 days after the submission of
such plan. The public hearings shall be
concluded no later than 45 days from the date
of submission of said plan.
Upon adoption of said plan by all of the
authorities mentioned herein, and upon its
approval by Congress, if such approval is
required to bind the Federal Government, it
shall become binding upon them as a formal
compact and agreement and shall supersede any
plan or law inconsistent therewith insofar as
-------
420
M. Barbash
same relates to the Great South Bay resource.
g) The Commission shall have the power to extend
any of the dates provided for herein for the
giving of notice and the holding of public
hearings regarding such plan.
15.	During the period in which the comprehensive
plan for Great South Bay is being formulated and until all
hearings thereon have been concluded, for the purpose of
protecting the present shoreline of the Great South Bay,
its wetlands, Bay bottoms and marine environment, to the
maximum extent possible, the Commission is empowered to
issue or deny permits, after public hearings, for any proposed
project, prior written notice of which shall be given to the
Commission, that involves placing fill in the Bay or ex-
tracting submerged materials from the Bay, dredging or other
public works or private projects that would have an adverse
effect upon the Bay resource; the exercise of the powers by
the Commission shall be judicially reviewable. The powers
of the Commission shall be in addition to and not a
substitute for those of local zoning bodies, units of
government, or town trustees of Bay bottoms and submerged
lands.
16.	The Commission may:
a) Accept grants, contributions, and
-------
421
M, Barbash
appropriations from any public agency,
private foundation, or individual.
b)	Appoint committees from its membership and
appoint advisory committees from other
interested public and private groups.
c)	Contract for or employ any professional
services required by the Commission or for
the performance of work and services which
in its opinion cannot satifactorily be per-
formed by its officers and employees or by
other Federal, State or local governmental
agencies.
d)	Do any and all other things necessary to
carry out the purposes of this title,
17.	The Commission shall, in addition to any
funds which the Legislature may appropriate for planning
activities of the Commission, take whatever steps are
necessary to attempt to obtain money available for such
planning activities from any Federal, State or local sources.
18.	The Commission shall appoint such executive
directors and employees as may be necessary in order to
carry out the function of the Commission.
19.	Within a reasonable time, but not to exceed
six months from the date of the first meeting of the
-------
U22
M. Barbash
Commission, the chairman of the Commission, in collaboration
with and with the concurrence of the Commission, shall
appoint a citizens' advisory committee to assist and advise
the Commission in carrying out its functions. The advisory
committee shall consist of not more than 20 members, nor
less than 9 members.
The advisory committee shall also include
representatives of conservation and recreation organizations,
and at least one biologist, one geologist, one architect,
one landscape architect, and one owner of privately held
lands within the Great South Bay as defined in Section 5.
Chapter 5. Pinal Report and Termination of
Existence of the Commission.
20.	The Commission shall file a progress report
or reports with the Governor and the Legislature at such
time or times as it shall deem suitable. A copy of the
final report shall be submitted to all participating agencies .
21.	The final report shall contain all the
following:
a)	An accounting of its operations and proceedings
and of its receipts and expenditures.
b)	The results of the detailed study made by
the Commission.
-------
423
M. Barbash
The comprehensive plan adopted by the
Commission for the conservation of the
Great South Bay resources.
The Commission's recommendation of the
appropriate agency to maintain and carry out
the comprehensive plan.
The results of the Commission's submission
of said plan for approval by the public
authorities and units of government mentioned
herein.
The Commission's estimate of the approximate
amount of money that will be necessary to
maintain and carry out the comprehensive
plan, including, but not limited to, the Com-
mission's estimate of the approximate amount
of money that will be necessary to purchase
real property which the Commission may recom-
mend to be purchased for public use, and an
indication of the possible sources of money
for such purposes, such as local bond funds,
federal grants, state funds, funds from
foundations, and funds from private sub-
scription .
Such other information and recommendations
-------
424
M. Barbash
as the Commission deems desirable,
22.	The existence of the Commission shall ter-
minate on the 90th day after the final adjournment of the
1970 Regular Session of the Legislature, but such Commission
shall have the power to extend its life for such additional
period of time, not exceeding three years, as they may deem
necessary to effectuate the purposes of this legislation.
23.	The sum of $250,000.00 is appropriated for
the purpose of the Great South Bay Conservation Commission
for expenditure for the support of the Commission during
the first fiscal year.
24.	If any provision of this act or the applica-
tion thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid,
such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applica-
tions of the act which can be given effect without the
invalid provision or application, and to this end the pro-
visions of this act are severable. )
-------
425
M. Barbash
MR. BARBASH: The proposal which I put before
you outlines our thinking on this in full. We think this
Commission should be funded, and then it should, first of
all, complete an exhaustive study of what Great South Bay
and Moriches Bay are from all respects.
There have been many fractional studies. You have
referred to the Cosulich study. You have heard of the
Woods Hole study. My library is full of studies, but nobody
has ever put them on one table before and tried to correlate
them to find out what they add up to as a whole picture.
Then they have to find out what the missing pieces
are and fill in those missing pieces, and out of this study
they must then evolve a resource management plan, to once
and for all manage this great resource.
But then we go one step further, because we are
tired of seeing plans wind up in bureaucratic desk drawers
or wastepaper baskets. We provide in our plan a timetable
for the implementation of these plans. We suggest that
;his Great South Bay resource management plan then be brought
:>ack to all levels of government, in particular the local
level of government, and at public hearings discussed, and
then voted upon and ratified, subscribed to by the levels of
government, and that this plan then become the management
plan for Great South Bay.
-------
426
M. Barbash
Speaker after speaker after speaker has urged
some sort of cooperative effort, but nobody has come forth
with the mechanism. We need the mechanism, and we think the
only intelligent mechanism is this Great South Bay Conserva-
tion Commission, combining all of the levels of government
with jurisdiction now in the bay, and besides which it does
something else. It provides us with the opportunity of
taking advantage of all of the resources and expertise
available on these various levels of government.
Our plan is the result of two years of work. We
have reviewed it with members of the Interior Department.
We have an endorsement of the concept of the plan from
Secretary Udall. We have reviewed it in detail with Dr.
Stanley Kane. We have reviewed it with our local supervisors,
with our bi-county planning chairman, and with members of the
State Department of Conservation, State Department of Public
Health, and we have included suggestions from all of these
people that we think were forthright and Intelligent and
pertinent to this plan.
I do hope that in your deliberations you will
take due cognizance of the plan that is offered to you, and
perhaps suggested as the proper mechanism for combining all
the interested parties into one effort to solve these
problems.
-------
427
M. Barbash
In conclusion, I wish to pledge that the Citizens'
Committee for Fire Island National Seashore, still alive
and kicking after its success in Fire Island, is now going
to go out into the field and try to create enough public
demand and pressure to assure the passage of this plan in
the coming State legislative session, and while we do so,
I pledge Gene Henkel our total cooperation in seeing that
the public is fully informed as to the importance of a
Suffolk County sewerage system here, and that we do hope
that our efforts will help him get the referendum approved
in February.
Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Barbash.
Let me ask you a technical question here —
MR. BARBASH; Maybe I should get my counsel up
here.
MR. STEIN: You might. I thought you might have
been the counsel.
MR. BARBASH: No, I am not.
MR. STEIN: All right. You stay with this, but
let me ask the question, because I think this goes to the
heart of the matter.
I have the letter here from Secretary Udall.
-------
428
M. Barbash
The question that I have here Is that you are
proposing a State law that has a lot of local people and
State people on a commission, Including a representative of
the Department of the Interior, Housing and Urban Development,
United States Corps of Engineers, and the Coast Guard, among
others.
In Mr. Udall's operation, he Is always in favor of
intergovernmental cooperation, and particularly this one,
as he said. I know he agrees with your purpose, and he put
this down, but he says that Interior would participate within
the limits of its legal capacity.
Later on, if you want this colloquy off the record,
I would be glad to take It out of this record.
MR. BARBASH: No. It is quite all right.
MR. STEIN: Have you looked into this question of
getting Federal participation on this commission, for Federal
members, by a State law?
MR. BARBASH: Well, I think there is precedent in
the San Francisco Bay legislation. I think they did set up
a similar commission regarding San Francisco Bay, and they
do have Federal participation. I don't think that needed an
Act of the Congress.
However, we do provide in our suggestion that, if
necessary, we will seek an Act of the Congress of the United
-------
H29
M, Barbash
States for this cooperation, but at this time it is not --
MR. STEIN: I think if you look at the others,
you may find them going in on Federal participation on,
what you might say in a legal sense, a voluntary basis.
We would always be glad to sit down with you
people and in cooperation with the State agencies, but the
question here is the one I have just mentioned.
Let me just read this:
"The Great South Bay Conservation Commission
is hereby created. The Commission shall consist
of members appointed as follows:
"One representative of the Department of
Interior appointed by the Secretary of the Interior."
This is the State legislature giving the duty to
the Secretary of the Interior to do this.
Now, as much as we cooperate with Dwight Metzler,
I wonder, Dwight, if you saw me come up with a Federal law
saying we are going to set up something and we want one
man here to be a member appointed by the State Commissioner
of Health, and this would be a Federal law and not a New
York law, what you would say. I am Just raising the question.
MR. BARBASH: Well, it does have precedents. I
know it has been done in San Francisco Bay.
MR. STEIN: I Just want to be sure that you have
-------
430
M. Barbash
looked into this,
I am all in favor of your purposes. My job,
among others, is to try to handle the legal problems with
the least friction.
MR. BARBASH: Right.
MR. STEIN: I hope you have looked into it.
MR. BARBASH: I think we have, because the
Interior Department's Legal Department has looked into it for
us, and has reviewed the suggested legislation.
MR. STEIN: Yes, but let me read the letter again.
The last sentence of the letter says this:
"Interior would participate within the limits
of its legal capacity."
I don't think there is anything wrong with it.
I would have written the same letter. I think it is a very
fine letter.
But again, if you feel satisfied on this point,
fine.
MR. BARBASH: Subsequent to that letter, the
review was made by the Interior's Legal Department.
MR. STEIN: All right.
MR. METZLER: Well, this is a very constructive
-------
431
M. Barbash
statement, and I am particularly pleased with the kind of
leadership you are offering here. It is this kind of leader-
ship we are going to need down here.
I don't think I have any questions to ask at this
time,
MR. BARBASH: Thank you.
MR. METZLER: Thank you for your presentation, Mr.
Barbash.
Hugh Mercer, General Manager of the Bluepoint
Company, is the next witness for New York.
STATEMENT OP HUGH MERCER, GENERAL MANAGER,
BLUEPOINT COMPANY, INC., WEST SAYVILLE,
LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK
MR. MERCER: Mr. Stein, conferees, ladies and
gentlemen:
I would like to place in the record abstracts to
supplement ray written report, as it were. However, I will
not restrict myself to my written remarks. I can't. That
is not my nature.
MR. STEIN: How long is your written statement?
MR. MERCER: My written statement, sir, might be
five minutes. I believe much of this other material may be
-------
432
H. Mercer
already available to the Commission.
MR. STEIN: We will include your statement as if
read, and include the others as exhibits and make these
available at our office to the State, but they won't be
printed in full in the record.
MR. MERCER: I appreciate that, and that is per-
fectly fine.
MR. STEIN: All right.
(The documents referred to will
be contained in the files of the
Department as exhibits.)
MR. MERCER: My name is Hugh Mercer. I am with
the Bluepoints Company in West Sayville. We are in the
shellfish business, and we are used to dealing with
uncertainty. There aren't very many of us left now, because
lots of them were not used to dealing with uncertainty.
I say this because we have had a long-running
interest in Great South Bay dating from the late 1800's.
Now, I take from my text here a quotation from
the "Effective Use of the Sea," a nicely bound White House
publication.
"A great public health problem is protein
deficiency."
-------
433
H. Mercer
"We recommend development of marine food
resources."
"We recommend augmenting of food supply through
marine agriculture."
Now, we and many others like us have been in marine
agriculture for many, many years.
I think a very basic problem here that we must
appreciate is that we have gone through considerations --
for example, let's bring it to a head. We have gone through
a consideration of the loss of the shellfish in the Immediate
adjcacent area to these tributaries. Is it two million?
Is it a quarter of a million? Is it any million? I really
don't care. It is a loss of shellfish, if it is only $200.
That is not the point.
Let me make a little point with you. What we
are losing, if we condone the present pollution, is that we
are losing an area that raises protein, has raised it, and
will raise it. With some care it can be multiplied.
A figure of five bushels of hard clams per acre
taken by mechanical methods was used as a measure in the
area. We get at least 30, 40 or 50 bushels per acre. We
won't go into that. It shows a change of method, but I
merely indicate that by cultivation, through this so-called
marine agriculture, there are great possibilities and
-------
434
H. Mercer
potentialities in the sea bottom.
We have gradually, in our oceanographic studies,
been getting around to recognize that this sea bottom we
are talking about is estuarlne sea bottom, not something off
the continental shelf, where you have no control at all. We
are talking, therefore, about a protein source, a food
supply.
As far as we are concerned in Bluepoints Company,
we are not directly affected by the collform discharges from
the duck farms. We are, however, affected by the indirect
pollution, which has been dwelled on at some length here by
Mr. Wallace and others, namely, that the undue nutriments
— quantity of nutriments — put in the water at this point
create obnoxious growths, which shellfish cannot accommodate
themselves to.
Someone has, facetiously, I am sure, suggested
that pollution should contribute as a food. We would be
very happy if this resulted in certains kinds of foods and
fattened up our oysters and clams, as it were. Unfortunately,
the kind of plants that arise out of this form of pollution
are not utilizable.
We have been following this problem of the so-
called duck pollution since 1932, when Mr. Joseph Glancy of
our company noted the peculiar coincidence between growth
-------
435
H. Mercer
in Great South Bay and this fertilization,
I myself have participated at a number of lovely
feasts that were held since 1951. The dinners were always
very nice.
Now I think we will get right to the nub of the
matter. We can draw certain conclusions from this.
What we have had here is an agricultural industry
dependent upon public subsidy. The subsidy has not been
codified in dollars and cents, because like in many rural
agricultural and many rural industries, we don't think in
terms of codifying it in dollars and cents. We are now
beginning to do so and are realizing it is costing us some-
thing to get duck meat out at 79 cents a pound, or something
like this. We have surrendered public resources to subsidize
this industry, I make that point again, and it is as pure
and simple as that. I will pursue that point in a minute.
The next point is this: We have thought in terms
of ducks and clams up to now. Duck men, clam men — wonder-
ful — all together in a farm bureau — and we are all in the
Farm Bureau. Unfortunately, we now have it certainly veri-
fied that ducks and clams cannot occupy the same geographic
location. We are using the water for entirely different
purposes, and one contradicts the other.
Unfortunately, I ara put in a bad position, because
-------
436
H. Mercer
my own conclusions will be construed as political. I do
believe that if the duck farmers are left where they are,
we are going to suffer continual diminishment in the shell-
fish industry in the loss of the protein source.
On the other hand, the duck farmers are not
growing protein, and it is a crime in my mind as a farmer
to see duck farmers eliminated.
Now, hold that for a minute.
We have had talk here, and this bothers me
excessively. We are talking about increasing studies into
waste disposal.
Now, we have made another point here. Duck wastes
are like animal wastes, are like human wastes. There is no
cheap way of reducing animal wastes. We don't bubble things
through. If we can't throw little chemicals in it, it won't
go away that easily.
I think that the study done on Long Island for
human wastes points something out to you. It requires
primary, secondary and tertiary treatment, in the sense that
a discharge from the full, complete treatment of wastes is
put into the Atlantic Ocean.
Why? Because we know that our local estuarine
waters will not bear this surplus nutrifying, or whatever
word you want to use. I am Irritated, so I don't know.
-------
^37
H. Mercer
Nowj the same thing goes down here. Here are
these farms located in a very difficult -- pretend those
were people discharging. They are humans discharging.
What has the Suffolk County Health Department required?
Primary, secondary and tertiary. These are animals putting
wastes in the water. They will require primary, secondary
and tertiary, and any engineer will tell you this is quite
an expensive proposition.
Now, I know we are going to go ahead with pilot
plants, and I know we are going to Albany, and I know we
are going to Washington, and we are going to try to get
dollars up. However, let's look at a little something here.
Look at the location of those farms. It is impossible,
really, without a great deal of cost, to pipe them all up
together.
I have put to one side Individual treatment plants
run by the farmers. For heaven's sake, if they can't take
a bulldozer and push up a lagoon, they are not going to
run a sophisticated treatment plant without constant super-
vision. That is to one side. I think that is nonsense to
consider.
Now, if you are going to put in a whole sewer
system, you are talking about what? $70 million? Who knows
how many millions of dollars!
-------
438
H. Mercer
Now, let's talk about this facetious proposal.
Let's say the cost came to $60 million. Maybe they ought
to buy the duck industry out and that would take care of
that. That is only worth $30 million. I am being facetious,
but I merely indicate before we pursue the pilot plant and
before we aerate this, let's consider this very carefully.
There are plenty of examples of what you can do with animal
wastes.
Now, I feel this: I do not like to think that
farms raising protein should be automatically eliminated in
a world that is going to be starving to death in thirty
years. That makes no sense.
Look at the location of those farms. They are in
just the worst place in the world to process wastes. They
are on marshland. They are on water.
I know this has been proposed before, and I bring
it to your attention again. Many industries have moved and
have done better. Isn't there a possibility that we could
eliminate at least the tertiary aspect, which is, as was
pointed out here, with carbon treatment, and so forth --
eliminate the tertiary aspect?
We are so sophisticated, and the difficulty really
is by the subsidizing, because we are doing it anyway. We
are subsidizing those farms. We are just talking of how
-------
^39
H. Mercer
much you want to subsidize them.
Move them and put them up in the middle of the
Island. I remarked at one time, why don't we move them to
the middle Island, and if we can grow fertile areas, and
get something to remain alive here. Maybe these farms could
be put in an area where we could use the lagoons, and the
effluent could be used as a fertilizer.
I must insist that we stop and consider this
blind business of "now, let's go to the next pilot plant."
There are too many examples of what has to be done here.
Now, I just want to read to you my recommendations,
and then I will stop, with only one more word, because I
know you are all hungry and you want to hear the next person.
I have spoken to current pollution here. I want
to speak to one other aspect of this thing. I am going to
neglect the inlet discussion, because the inlet discussion
for flushing can be reduced to ad absurdum. Remove Fire
Island Barrier Beach and you will take care of the pollution
problem. That is the ad absurdum of inlet discussion for
pollution. Let's Just forget that.
Let's talk now about sludge banks. We have a
picture of the removal of sludge banks. This is not easy.
I have participated in a little experiment watching sludge
banks being removed last spring. It cost $1.25 a cubic
-------
440
H. Mercer
yard under the best circumstances, to remove It and put it
in the ocean, where it must go, because we have had experience
of just dumping it in the bay, and I figure that we lost
$100,000 in oysters last year from that experiment when that
stuff came down and fertilized our oysters up to nice, black
fin bladders.
I won't go Into that. We don't cry in the shell-
fish business.
Now, it cost $1.25 to move those sludge banks out
of there and put them in the ocean. It cost a half a
million dollars to move them up to a couple of those little
triangles up there, of the type of seacup cove, and it is
still there. It keeps falling in. Now, that is a half a
million dollars in that little spot.
I would suggest that a great amount of thought be
given to whether you want to talk about removing duck
sludge. I would suggest for the minute the best thing to
be done would be (l) stop adding to it, and (2) leave it
alone. Don't go down there and try to dredge it and throw
it up on lands and things. Let it cook there for a minute
until we figure out some other way to do it.
I want to remind you there is plenty of evidence
in other industries, such as strip mining in Pennsylvania
and Kentucky, where there is this miserable business, but
-------
HHi
H. Mercer
the public has to put up with it. I am afraid this Is a
miserable mess, and we are just going to have to bear the
fact of industrialization or commercial activity.
Now, I believe, in view of the hard biological
facts, that there should be orders demanding primary,
secondary and tertiary treatment, and fines to be leveled
on these several polluters ranging certainly up to $500 a
day. You have to enforce the thing.
There should be a period of one year's grace for
completing and operating Installations, during which time,
obviously, the farmers will seek public subsidy.
If a public subsidy is granted, because we have
been granting it all the time — if it is granted, the farm
must consent to removal from the waterfront. I think this
is imperative. I don't think there is any other solution
under the present arrangement, and, frankly -- well, let's
not get frank about it. Since it is the phosphates and the
nitrates that are the most expensive to remove, this move
makes sense.
Now, pay the farmer an amount no greater than the
social value of some other protein producer. Now, the
agriculture on Long Island is getting a quarter of a million
dollars. They get this year after year, and there is no
difficulty.
-------
H. Mercer
See to it that there is a financial subsidy. I
think there should be a subsidy of the duck growers. They
are a protein source. We have to have a limit or a ceiling
on this, and that has got to be studied right now, because
they are going to be coming around looking for money from
the taxpayers of this State.
In no case should the subsidy be greater than the
value of the industry.
Sludge areas must be surveyed. Some areas are
irretrievable. At the present rate of $1.25 per cubic yard,
why, there has to be careful measurement of that massive
expenditure.
Above all, decisions must be removed from the local
authorities. At this stage of time, conservation and pollu-
tion clean-ups are at the same status as civil rights. We
get a good kicking around when the Feds go home.
Thank you.
(The full prepared statement submitted by Mr.
Mercer is as follows:
We in the shellfish business are used to dealing
with uncertainty, we have all the risks inherent to nature
and the unpredictables. We have lived with these and some
few of us have survived. We say "few" since the number of
persons and firms drawing a commercial living of any form
-------
443
H. Mercer
from the sea in these United States is constantly declining.
Belatedly, the public is becoming aware of the
consequences of this decline, for the decline in persons is
reflected in the decline in production. At whatever figure
one looks, no segment of American fisheries is producing
today what it was even 20 years ago, much less what the
potential might be as projected by such studies as embodied
in the Report of the Panel on Oceanography in its "Effective
Use of the Sea."
"A great public health problem is protein
deficiency.ij - p. X
"We recommend development of marine food
resources." - p. X
"We recommend...augmenting of food supply
through marine agriculture," - p. II
Unfortunately, the Panel also notes that the
marine environment and its promise is destroyed by pollution.
It recommends intensification of control over pollution
as to permit the utilization of marine food resources.
And there we are: As we noted, we can bear many
risks, but even a seventy-five-year-old firm that has sur-
vived hurricanes, mass predation of starfish, encroachment
of every sort of pest, that firm cannot survive uncontrolled
pollution.
-------
m
H. Mercer
Our specific case can be summed up quite simply.
Since the early 1900's (say 1915) an agricultural industry,
specifically duck ranching, has used the local salt water
tributaries of Moriches and adjacent bays along the south
shore of Long Island as catch basins for duck wastes and
other discard materials. For many years and in many places,
such a procedure has been considered normal.
As early as 1932, Mr. Joseph Glancy, associated
with Bluepoints Company, noted that conditions of shellfish
in Great South Bay, miles from Moriches Bay proper, varied
directly with distinctive varieties of algae. He named the
algae "small Form."
About 19^7, Great South Bay became unusable for
shellfish. Dank of color, filled with a wormlike growth,
the Bay yielded an oyster thin and black-gilled, and even-
tually no oysters at all. Even the hard clam, a hardy
brute, diminished in yield and quality until it was virtually
impossible to market. This condition persisted for a season.
Late in the year Mr. Glancy arranged for Dr. James B.
Lackey to study the Bay. His views (see Abstract No. II)
lead to the precedential and pioneering research of Woods
Hole Oceanographic Institution. (See Abstract I). The
project indicated that duck ranchers were not only directly
polluting the local tributaries (a fact well corroborated
-------
445
H. Mercer
by County Health Department studies and one's own nose)
but were, in addition, responsible for the indirect
secondary pollution of Great South Bay. For this extra-
ordinary fertilization resulted in consequent deterioration
of conditions necessary for shellfish welfare. (See
"Conclusion" - No. Ill; excerpt from "Restoring the
Quality of Our Environment, ) The Reports are admirably
utilized by Mr. Joseph Glancy in his own report, "Biological
Benefits of Moriches Inlet...J. B. Glancy, 3-30-56,
Report to New York Corps of Engineers.
About 1949* New York State passed a Water Pollu-
tion Control Act, The consequences of current duck raising
practices were so blatant that an abatement program was
fastened upon the industry. A formal series of abatement
steps or "phases" were drawn up. Originally, all four phases
were to be completely in effect upon all ranches by the
season of 1963. This has never been accomplished. Indeed,
the "Status of the Treatment of Duck Wastes in Suffolk County
- 1963 Season" (No. V) indicates the situation well. Only
18 of the 48 farms were operating phase one satisfactorily,
and only a small proportion had installed the machinery for
phase two. Resistance and non-compliance were rampant.
The chronicle is only too poignant. The duck industry,
itself, is well aware of its responsibility and action as
-------
446
H. Mercer
indicated in its own "Report of Long Island Duck Farmers
Co-op." 1965 - (see No. VI). And the Health Department
of Suffolk County has acknowledge the morass (see State-
ment of H. W. David, Director of Environmental Health
Service, 1963) - No. VII.
In the summer of 1965 there occurred an event
which indicated the pollution problem was not simple. For
some years natural factors had combined to hold back from
Great South Bay the everpresent threat from the east. In
July of 1965 we at West Sayville experienced in our shellfish
hatchery the first massive larval mortality we had had in
six years of operation. Despite every effort, we were unable
to resume normal procedures. By August 10, 1965, it was
obvious that "small form" had reappeared. Oysters and
clams repeated the black gills and thin meat characteristic
of the worst years between 19^7-1952.
Casting about for explanations for the massive
and completely unprecedential suddenness of the algal
growth, we noted an interesting coincidence. The County of
Suffolk in May of 1965 had commenced large-scale dredging
operations in Tuthill Cove and Forge River of Moriches Bay.
The dredged material which was predominantly duck sludge was
deposited in large part in the Moriches Bay itself. (See
Abstract No. VIII.)
-------
447
H. Mercer
Dr. James Lackey in his "Rehabilitation of
Great South Bay - 1951" had noted:
"...these procedures (for controlling current duck
waste) would provide no immediate absolute relief
in Great South Bay because of the deep sludge
deposit in the Forge and Carmen Rivers. These
will provide partial fertilization for some time
to come...11
(See Abstract No. II, p. E.)
There was adequate suspicion to take exception
to this dredging. Others had already taken exception
because of esthetic and health reasons. Duck sludge is not
only a far from satisfactory fill, but a remarkable nuisance.
Plans were afoot to force the county to reroute any further
spoil away from sensitive land areas and out of the Bay
entirely. When the spring of 1966 arrived, the next massive
dredging spoil was directed into the Atlantic Ocean. This
year the hatchery has operated properly and nannchlorls has
been minimal.
A pioneering study of the latter dredging by the
New York State Conservation Department and the Pish and
Wildlife Service documents the remarkable flocculency of
the dredge spoil when duck waste constitutes the bulk. The
suspicion appears to be validated. Thus, we now have the
-------
448
H. Mercer
problem not only of dealing with current pollution but
with the black heritage of fifty years of waste dispersion •
a heritage being incremented every growing season.
The difficulties in the whole matter have been
compounded by the fact that compliance to the present abate-
ment program would probably obtain little abatement. This
is adequately summed by a contrast of two statements:
"The result of this study... indicated that
plain sedimentation would remove better than 90
percent of the settleable solids and would be
accompanied by a reduction in the B.O.D., phosphate
and nitrogen content of the wastes."
Investigation of Waste From Duck Farms in
Suffolk County
N. Y, State Department of Health - 1953
(Abstract No. IX)
"The sedimentation lagoons... presently used
for waste treatment at Suffolk County duck farms
are inadequate for effective pollution control.
The units are only partially effective in removing
settleable solids, and are not effective in removing
Biochemical Oxygen Demand, nitrogen, phosphates
and microorganisms."
-------
bh9
H. Mercer
Treatment of Duck Wastes
Report of William F. Cosulich to County
Health Department 3/8/66
(Abstract No. X)
After 15 years of maneuvering, the problems are
just as simple as they were in the beginning and perhaps just
as far from solution:
A.	Animal wastes in wholesale quantities
affect the quality of receiving waters.
If quality is to be maintained., the animal
waste must not be so discharged at all OR
must be subjected to presently known and
recommended techniques of organic reduction,
namely primary, secondary and, in the case
of sensitive receiving waters, tertiary
sewage treatment.
A separate and distinct problem has, however,
beclouded the whole issue and has resulted in the obviously
jerry-built, claptrap devices of abatement.
B.	An industry has long enjoyed a social
subsidy, in the present case - reflected
in the social cost of polluted waters
and degraded environment, and loss of
related resources including shellfish.
-------
450
H. Mercer
Now an aroused public detects the
social cost. Will that aroused public bear
the financial cost of providing adequate
and appropriate alternative to degraded
waters - namely, a sewerage system for these
few but filthy farms?
Or is it now that the cost that was
seemingly Intangible before when reflected
in dollars and cents so high that the
industry on net consideration is not worth
the subsidy?
This conference is the forum to see if public
representatives have reached the point of sufficient courage
to answer these questions and, in answering them, set a
precedent for the multitude of areas where the duck waste
problem is a prototype,, if they have not, then uncertainty
of pollution will continue to reduce our fisheries; and, if
they have not, their inaction makes a mockery of all the
brave words that abound in "The Effective Use of the Sea."
Recommendations:
I. In view of the hard biological facts, final and
definitive and enforceable ($500 a day fines) orders
-------
451
H. Mercer
demanding primary, secondary and tertiary treatment be
be served on the several polluters Immediately.
II, There be a period of one year grace for completed and
operating installation during which time the farmers can
attempt to secure a public subsidy.
III. Any public subsidy, if obtained, must:
A. Remove the farm from the waterfront. Since it is
the phosphates and nitrates that are most expensive
to remove and are the culprits of the long-
reaching pollution and it is open receiving waters
most affected, this is a necessary provision to
keep costs somewhat under control.
B. Pay to the farm no amount greater than the net
social value of a protein producer, i.e., if the
same dollars can yield more protein in another
source that is the limit.
C. In no case be greater than the value of the
industry.
-------
452
H. Mercer
IV.	Sludge areas must be surveyed. Some areas are
irretrievable. At the present rate of $1.25 a cubic
yard to remove to the Atlantic Ocean, where it must
be put or great harm done to estuarine resources, there
must be careful judgment about this massive expenditure.
V.	Above all, any decisions must be removed from the
local authorities. At this stage of time conservation
and pollution clean-up is in the same category as
civil rights. They get a good kicking around when the
Peds go home.)
MR, STEIN: Thank you.
Are there any comments or questions?
MR. METZLER: It seems to me he threw the challenge
down to you.
(Laughter.)
MR. STEIN: Not to me. Mr. Mercer has been in my
office in Washington. He hasn't changed a bit.
(Laughter.)
I think your points are very well taken and they
will be given consideration.
I don't know if you want to prolong this, but we
have a problem here. You have raised some very, very
-------
H. Mercer	453
salient and interesting points, but if you talk in terms
of subsidy, subsidy by whom?
I have worked in the grants field, as you probably
have guessed. We used to call this -- and I guess they
still do -- the Ickes law of government. Harold Ickes,
who was a former Secretary of the Interior, as you know,
used to say any bright, young boy he had on the staff could
develop a system of grants, but unless you could develop
the system where you were going to cut the pie -- and in
those days it was at least 48 different ways -- you weren't
going to get it through the Congress.
The question here is, who is going to do it?
What we are dealing with here, Mr. Mercer -- and I think
we have to recognize it, and I hope you will, and I think
Mr. Metzler has to recognize it -- Is whatever we may think
about an ultimate social solution to a problem, people like
Mr. Metzler and I are here to enforce the law we have on the
books.
We have to work within the scope and limitations
of the powers and laws we have now, and even though we
would like to come to some broader conclusions, we have to
limit our horizons in the solutions we may come up with.
MR. MERCER: Yes.
MR. STEIN: But I can't disagree with what you say.
Thank you.
-------
454
E. S. Furman
MR. MERCER: Thank you.
MR. METZLER: Mr. Purman is the next witness. He
is the President of the Southampton Town Baymen's Association.
Mr. Purman.
STATEMENT OF EDWIN S. PURMAN, PRESIDENT,
SOUTHAMPTON TOWN BAYMEN'S ASSOCIATION, INC.
MR. PURMAN: I don't know what I can say after
Mr. Mercer, and have much effect.
All I can say is that I have worked in this area
all my life, from Babylon to Southampton, and I have seen
what happens with these changes « new inlets, no inlets,
inlets reopened.
I did have an exhibit here, but some reporters
walked off with it, and I can't find it now, which I wanted
to give you.
Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. PURMAN: Anyway, it was some clams which were
killed recently, this summer, due to the excessive grass
growth in Moriches Bay, which we have been told by scientists
results from these phosphates and things that are brought
down with the pollution.
-------
455
E. S. Furman
I would like to show you here on the map where
they were killed. They were taken right off this area here
(indicating).
MR. STEIN: Why don't you describe it? That is a
little inland from Westhampton Beach.
MR. FURMAN: The eastern end of this district,
the Westhampton Beach Bay. There are probably several
hundred acres in here where there was so much grass, we
couldn't work. It is opposite South Beaver Dam Creek. In
all that area, we couldn't work all summer because of this
grass growth, and now, when we begin to try it, 50 percent
of those clams are dead over a lot of that area.
Mr. Wallace yesterday gave us a figure of five
buahel3 per acre from this area. I would like to point
out practically all our production in the summer comes from
this area (indicating) —
MR. STEIN: You see, the difficulty is the
record will not show what it is. Describe it, please.
MR. FURMAN: From the West Bay Bridge to dunning
Point. You compare that with the rest of the bay. Prac-
tically all the production comes from that area during the
summer.
Our soft clam production is restricted entirely
during the summer. They are produced over here on the
-------
456
E. S. Furman
north shore, where it is condemned for six months of a
year at a time when we need those soft clams. We have a
market for them locally at a good price.
When it is opened the first of November, most of
them have to be shipped to the market, where you compete
with the Maryland clams, and you get very little for them.
Mr. Mercer spoke about the solution to the inlets,
more and bigger inlets, a little bit drastically, I think,
but we know that is not going to happen, so we have to deal
with the inlets.
There has been a lot of agitation to improving
Moriches Inlet. That is all to the good, but the more you
open these inlets, the more it pushes the hard clam produc-
tion back into these polluted areas, where you can't work
them.
Now, this area I pointed out is as far as you can
get away from Moriches Inlet and Moriches Bay. You will
notice that.
If you open up the inlet, let's say you double
the flow of water coming through there, you are going to
have less hard clam production, simply because you are
going to bring in muBaels and starfish, and there is very
little market for mussels. I don't believe two men could
make a living continuously on mussels if you had all of
-------
Zj57
E. S, Furman
the bay.
The same thing goes for South Bay. If you put
a new inlet in there, you would eliminate thousands of
acres of hard clam production, the area producing hard
clams now.
MR, STEIN: Let me ask you a question on that,
just because I think you have arrived at a crucial point
here, at least in my own mind.
The way I understood the proposition on these
inlets, there is always a problem, I know, whenever you are
talking about dredging or opening inlets or closing them.
You get various pulls from different water interests, but,
as I understood this, this would require some delicate
management of the equilibrium of the salt that you are
getting inside.
If opening these is going to be deleterious to
the shellfish industry, obviously I don't think this is
going to be good, but I think some of the proponents of
stabilizing those inlets had the notion that if the inlets
are stabilized, rather than it being deleterious to the shell-
fish industry, it is going to help.
Now, I think we should try to at least arrive at
a technical resolution of this. I don't know that there
-------
458
E. S. Furman
are absolute differences. My opinion in a pollution case
is that we are dealing with physical facts. Sometimes they
are hard to find, and sometimes they are hard to measure.
Also, I believe that since we are dealing with
physical facts, we can get all reasonable people to agree
what those facts are if we take the time to do this right.
The point is, I think this ia the kind of
physical facts on the water coming through the inlets,
and, at least the stabilization of these inlets that every-
one could agree on — at least, what is going to happen.
This should be Dave Wallace; it should be the
State Health Department, the duck growers, the oyster
growers, and the Federal people. There should not be any
conflict.
The problem X have is this: Before we can make a
determination on what position to take on this, we certainly
should make every effort to see if we can get agreement on
the facts on these inlets.
MR. FURMAN: Well, I have a suggestion here that
has not been brought out at all, to my knowledge.
As far as Moriches Inlet and Shinnecock Inlet go,
I think they should be controlled.
Now, the Army Engineers brought out a plan last
fall, Just such a plan, up at Jones and East Rockaway
-------
459
E. S. Furman
Inlets. There are gates.
At times, the bay would be much better off if
that were closed off temporarily — I mean, in such a way
that the storm tide comes in maybe — but closed off at a
time when it gets too high. If it is near hard clam setting
time, you could regulate it with these gates, and they could
be regulated and adjusted so that they would allow the ebb
tide to flow at all times. You would eliminate a lot of the
influx of the tremendous amount of sand.
Look at that map. All of that sand is washed into
Moriches Inlet at storm time.
MR. STEIN.• As I understand you, Mr. Furman, you
have no objection to controlled inlets?
MR. FURMAN: I would like to see controlled inlets.
MR, STEIN: I hope we are all saying the same
thing, and we are not very far apart.
By the way, I think we have a parallel here of
what we are running into in almost every river in the United
States, and we are Just getting this in the coves.
Today, then, we have free-flowing rivers, at least
in our major rivers and the ones that we don't designate
under our wild rivers in the interior are few and far
between, because we are damming and having channels put on
all our rivers. The sad commentary is that it has required
-------
460
E. S. Furman
catastrophe after catastrophe for us to recognize this
before we take action. I hope we won't have it here.
Just look at the Mississippi. I am sure a lot of
the people in this room can remember the twenties. How
many floods did we have to have up and down the Mississippi
and the Missouri before we recognized we had to have those
dams and other methods of flood control?
This is the kind of thing that we may very well
be talking about in terms of when we are talking about the
inlets. I think if we can get away from this notion of
dredging, non-dredging, open and non-open, but if we could
use possibly the formulation that Mr. Purman has talked
about of controlled inlets so that we will have conditions
which we all can agree, at least in a scientific sense,
will be helpful to the maximum number of water uses for the
shellfish, and protect the inside, maybe we can move forward.
I think a lot of this clash may come because we
are not ready to use the same words for what we mean and
arrive at agreement.
As far as I can understand you now, I think we
are pretty much in agreement.
MR, PURMAN: Perhaps you will want to look at
that.
MR, STEIN: Thank you. Do you want to continue?
-------
461
E. S. Furman
MR. FURMAN: Just to say that I would like to
agree with Mr. Mercer.
I think the only solution for the duck farms is
to get off of tide water. I don't see how you are going to
clean up the situation otherwise.
Certainly, one thing is sure. No matter how many
inlets you put through there, you are not going to flush
that bay any more than Planter's Bay is flushed naturally.
MR. STEIN: Let me again give you something that
is embodied in our law, and something else.
I don't think the purpose of controlling inlets or
the control or release of water on a dam in Federal policy --
and I am sure the States see eye to eye on this is any
substitute, or can be any substitute for controlling pollu-
tion at its source.
The question here is that even if you control
pollution at its source, you may have to control the flow
of water to achieve optimum conditions for the purposes that
you want to use that water for.
No one is proposing to let anyone, whether it is
any industry or any municipality, dump wastes in and use
some kind of a public works device to just flush it out.
The point here is even if we get proper treatment at the
rce, we may still need to control the inlets for maximum
-------
462
E. S. Furman
purposes. That is the only thing.
I don't think we would go for that in the recom-
mendations. I don't think the Corps of Engineers would
entertain the project on any other basis either.
MR. FURMAN: All right. Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
MR. METZLER: Thank you, Mr. Furman, for a very
constructive statement.
The next witness is Dr. George Vanderborgh of
the Oyster Institute of North America.
Dr. Vanderborgh.
STATEMENT OF DR. GEORGE H. VANDERBORGH, SR.,
REPRESENTING THE OYSTER INSTITUTE OF NORTH
AMERICA AND THE LONG ISLAND SHELLFISH
FARMERS, INC.
DR. VANDERBORGH: Mr. Stein, members of the panel,
ladies and gentlemen:
I think we have reached the point where not much
new can be said, and therefore I will Just take a very few
excerpts from the things I had to present.
My name is George H. Vanderborgh, Sr., and I am
speaking as a representative of the Oyster Institute of
-------
463
Dr. G. H. Vanderborgh, Sr.
North America, and the Long Island Shellfish Farmers, Inc.
The quality of the waters in which shellfish feed
and grow determines the fatness of glycogen content as well
as their marketability.
Pollution in its broad term Includes over-
fertilization caused by algal blooms, termed nutrient
pollution, as well as that which is caused by harmful
bacteria. The former causes the shellfish to be unsalable;
the latter renders shellfish impure. Over-fertilization
is caused by the over-abundance of nutrients such as
nitrogen and phosphorus and is a primary concern to the shell-
fish farmer. The duck farms have positively been recognized
as the source of this over-abundance.
A tremendous amount of damage is done by water-
borne predators such as starfish and drills, residents of
the bottoms and waters which transport them.
Shortly after the end of World War II, the shell-
fish farming production in our area was at an all-time low,
almost nonexistent. A few determined shellfish farmers,
together with local town officials from Islip and Brookhaven,
and representatives from the New York State Conservation
Department, planned a biological study program to determine
the cause of curtailed shellfish production in Great South
and to recommend remedies and cures.
-------
464
Dr. G. H. Vanderborgh, Sr.
The Woods Hole Ocfeanographic Institution, which
you have heard mentioned many times, was retained by this
group to do a detailed study of Great South Bay. The
unanimous conclusion reached was that the over-fertilization
of the waters caused by the duck farm wastes, combined with
a peculiar water circulation pattern, caused a bloom of
small plankton algae, called Nannochloris, of over five
million per c.c. of water, which was the chief deterrent
of shellfish production in the bay.
Without going any further, among the recommenda-
tions made were:
1.	Elimination of duck farm wastes entering the
waters.
As one or two speakers have said before, that
might mean removal of the duck farms from where they operate
now.
2.	Construction of a tidewater gate at Smith's
Point to curtail the flow of duck wastes from Moriches Bay
to Great South Bay.
3.	The dredging of Moriches Inlet to allow the
duck wastes to flow out into the Atlantic Ocean, immediately
to the south, rather than to flow westward into Great South
Bay.
The positive way to eliminate duck wastes
-------
465
Dr. G, H, Vanderborgh, Sr.
from entering the waters is to remove them at the source,
namely., the duck farms.
Also, dredging of the inlets is a continuing
necessity.
Only after these things have been accomplished
will we be ready for further developments of the resources
of the sea through laboratory propagation and marine farming.
Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Vanderborgh.
Are there any questions or comments?
MR. METZLER: May I ask a single question here?
Would you have an opinion on this business that
we have been hearing discussed about flushing action and
more inlets into the Moriches Bay?
DR. VANDERBORGH: I think we need the flushing
action of the inlets, especially those of Moriches and Fire
Island.
I would recommend, however, rather than Fire
Island on the improved inlet, to move it about five miles
to our west here, because you need deep water on both sides
of an inlet, and if the inlet were placed somewhere near
Fire Island Lighthouse, we would have deep water in the
bay side and deep water on the ocean side, and it would be
self-cleansing.
-------
466
Dr. G, H. Vanderborgh, Sr.
MR. METZLER: Thank you very much for a very helpful
statement.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
MR. METZLER: The next witness Is Mr. Adrian
Hoek of the Great South Bay Baymen's Association.
STATEMENT OF ADRIAN HOEK, REPRESENTING THE
GREAT SOUTH BAY BAYMEN'S ASSOCIATION
MR. HOEK: Mr. Chairman, members of the panel:
I have no written statement. I have been a silent
listener here for a day and a half.
You have heard Mr. Mercer speak. Mr. Mercer and
I have worked hand In hand, and what he said today and the
statements that he has presented to you, I okay. We have
worked together for years. I am on the Pollution Committee
with Mr. Mercer, and we thoroughly understand one another.
As a silent listener, I hope not, but I believe
that the industry really yesterday and today got a little
blow below the belt, I hope not. I hope the press doesn't
elaborate on this. I hope it doesn't come out with glaring
letters.
Our bay is not as bad as has been pointed out.
Don't think that. There are polluted areas, as the map
-------
467
A. Hoek
shows, but in the areas where the water is pure the clams
are very good.
I have followed this bay since I was nine years
old. I am now sixty-five. I have eaten clams all my life,
and I can still do a good day's work.
With regard to the inlets, when I hear some people
talk about a new inlet I shudder, because Who knows what a
new inlet, especially an inlet off Patchogue, would do to
our bay.
We know what happened in Shinnecock. The men
down in that way tell me that acres and acres of land that
were productive at one time are now ruined by Shinnecock
Inlet.
Moriches Inlet? Of course, we need Moriches
Inlet, but we only need Moriches Inlet as a flushing inlet.
We don't want to make that navigable.
In 1931, I believe, Moriches Inlet was formed.
By 1938, with the great amount of water coming down through
Moriches Inlet, I was told — I don't know if it is true —
that the duck pollution by the tides from Moriches Inlet
driven into the bays off Patchogue ruined our oyster
industry. There was a little worm that came along and
built its houBe on the oyster, and eventually it grew over
the bill of the oyster, and all our oysters were lost.
-------
468
A. Hoek
Now Mother Nature has given us another good set
of oysters in this bay off Patchogue that I am talking
aboutj so let's not disturb Moriches Inlet too much. Just
let it be a flushing inlet and let's save what Mother
Nature has put there right now.
I have another gripe. I represent, I would say,
over 2,000 baymen. We feel as though the National Seashore
is not too much of an asset for us. We have met with the
Committee for the National Seashore. They have told us that
in the future, as they need land under water, they will
acquire it.
Up until this point they have acquired some land.
In Sailor's Haven they have taken a thousand feet east and
west, a thousand feet off shore. They have stopped us from
working in that area. That area is heavily populated with
clams. I know men that have caught 12 to 20 bushels of
clams a day, little necks, in that area.
Clams are sold today for $13 a bushel, so you
realize what that means to us fellows that work by the sweat
of our brow. That is a big thing.
Now, I understand Mr. Barbash — I was silently
listening this morning — Mr. Barbash, who represents the
Seashore, wants more power.
In the years to come, can't you see that eventually
-------
469
A. Hoek
they will take more land and more land, and by taking more
land they are eliminating our area to work? I understand
that they can take a mile-long shore. Our bay is only five
miles wide. At the widest part, our bay is only five miles
wide.
In a lot of our bay, there are areas that are
absolutely mud, unproductive, with nothing growing in it,
and we have a very small area to work in; so if the
National Seashore is going to take that attitude and stop
us clam diggers from working in these areas that they take
over, which eventually anyone can see that they are going
to make this a recreation center — anyone can see that.
We see that. That is coming, and if they are going to keep
squeezing us out, we will have to go on relief.
We are proud. During the depression I worked for
ten hours a day for a dollar and a half. We are proud of
ourselves. We don't want to go on relief. We are the salt
of the earth, but if these things keep on, we are absolutely
going to be squeezed out.
Another facet as to the inlets. Mr. Vanderborgh
suggested that the inlet be placed further east. I agree
with him. That inlet should be by the lighthouse, just
west of the lighthouse. There is,*1 would say, 25 to 30
feet of water inside.
-------
470
A, Hoek
The only way to maintain a good inlet is to have
deep water inside. That is why Moriches Inlet will never
be a navigable inlet, because there are acres and acres of
land at the ebb tide that you and I can walk on with our
shoes. It absolutely runs dry. But at the lighthouse, it
is a very good place to place an inlet. There you have the
west channel and you have the east channel that are entering
the bay, and the ocean would have no trouble whatsoever to
enter and cleanse our bays.
This is all I have to offer, fellows, but I shudder
-- I will say again I shudder when I hear of a new inlet off
Patchogue.
Thank you,
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Hoek.
Are there any questions or comments?
MR. METZLER: I don't believe there are.
We are grateful to you for bringing a slightly
different point of view, however, than we have heard before,
Mr. Hoek, and I appreciate your presentation. We will con-
sider this carefully. Your experience between age nine and
age sixty-five is not to be taken lightly.
MR. HOEK: I have followed the bay all my life.
Thank you.
MR. METZLER: Is Mr. Robert Vojvoda here? This
-------
471
R. Vojvoda
is the last witness we have, Mr. Robert Vojvoda, who Is the
Supervisor from Riverhead.
Mr, Vojvoda.
STATEMENT OP ROBERT VOJVODA, SUPERVISOR,
TOWN OF RIVERHEAD
MR. VOJVODA: Mr. Chairman, members of the panel:
Before starting, I want to make sure that as an
east-ender, Charlie Dominy doesn't mind me coming into the
west end and having a few words this morning.
Charlie, is it all right?
MR. DOMINY: Don't say too much.
(Laughter. )
MR. VOJVODA: All right. I promise to keep it
short.
Sitting in the background, what I saw happen
here today is something that happened in Riverhead two or
three years ago, and I am just hopeful that you can come
out of this meeting today with the same things that we had
come out of ours, but I am afraid we are going to come out
of this with the same old story.
We are going to have selfish interests. We are
going to fight one another and never sit around at a round
-------
472
R, Vojvoda
table and come to some answers. If this happens, this
meeting is useless.
I want to give you an idea of what happened in
Riverhead. In the Town Board, we had mothers, we had people
come in with dead ducks in their hands, saying, "What are
we going to do about it? What are we going to do about it?"
Naturally, as the Supervisor, I went to the duck
farmers. I found that for over fifteen years, there has
been a lot of publicity about this, but no one had ever' sat
down and talked with the duck farmers. The papers gave
them hell. The politicians gave them hell. The housewives
gave them hell. The poor duck farmers were told by the
State Health Department to try this, try that, but they
weren't given any answers.
I am chairman of a committee and I asked for
people who wanted to be workers. I came up with a committee,
and you have seen the results of our survey.
The duck farmers have been one of the most
cooperative industries that I have had the pleasure of
working with. Possibly many people would say I should not
say that, because there are a lot of people that aren't
duck farmers, but I wish I could get the same cooperation
out of the public when we have a problem,
I think we have answered the problem. I think we
-------
473
R. Vojvoda
do have the answer. Let's face it.
I want to give you an idea of what happens when
you do correct some of the other problems.
Rlverhead only had three or four creeks, and we
had eighteen or twenty feet of duck manure lying in them
for thirty and forty years, and they would bubble, and houses
would lose their colors. They changed from white to yellow.
We didn't have the problem with the conserva-
tionists because Mr. Wallace was very helpful in my town.
We obtained the necessary permits. We did a lot of dredging
in Riverhead, and we have a little more going on.
We did have some clams in these creeks which we
wanted to move. We arranged to transport these into good
waters and protected them. We have moved 1,800 bushels that
the Town of Riverhead put up the money for. We kept them
six weeks and had a bay constable watching them.
Lo and behold, what happened when we opened them
up? The commercial interests cleaned them out in a couple
of weeks, and we did not get anything. The people of
Riverhead did not get a chance to use the clams that we
paid the money to transport. The same thing happened with
soft clams. They cleaned them out.
So, you have to get the fishing industries as
well as the duck Interests, as well as everyone, working
-------
UjH
R. Vojvoda
together on this. You cannot have one interest hollering
that we want to safeguard the clams and everything else,
because Riverhead is not going to move any more clams in
the Town of Riverhead until the Conservation Department or
someone gives us control over the clams that we transport.
That is the only way the Town of Riverhead will spend any
more money transporting clams.
And, believe It or not, where we have the biggest
abundance of clams is in the highly polluted area in the
mouths of the creeks from the duck farms. They are so
thick that when the dredge went in there, the dredge had
approximately six to eight inches side boards, and that
dredge brought them up so thick that they were falling off
the sides of the dredges. Mr. Wallace was surprised, and
I was surprised.
We still have thousands and thousands of bushels
sitting in there, but as long as I am the Supervisor of
Riverhead and I have the same Town Board, we will never
bring another bushel because of what happened when we did
move them.
I just bring this out, because I know the fish
men are going to holler and say I am wrong. The duck
farmers did this with me, but we sat down at a table and
we solved our problems.
-------
475
R. Vojvoda
Let's not holler at each other, but let's sit
down in one room, and everybody give a little bit, because
you are going to have to.
If you are not going to sit down and give a little
bit, you are dead. Forget your problem right now.
The duck farmers today really caught hell,
and I will tell you why. There is another thing. What
about boats? Let's not kid ourselves. I have a boat and
I have four kids, and they love soda, pop corn and cracker-
jacks, and, believe me, when I go on the bay, when they
drink soda, it's back and forth to the head all day.
You look at the number of boats in our bays.
Something has got to be done with the boating industry. It
is one of those things that politicians and people don't
like to admit, but unless you take the bull by the horns,
you are still going to end up with the problem.
Last, but not least, what about detergents?
Don't kid yourself.
We have a bad area along the Peconic Bay. We
have an area of homes where they can put down three or four
wells a year. It is not the duck pollution that is the
problem; it is the detergent problem.
The sooner Long Island and the politicians and
New York State take the bull by the horns, and ban detergents
-------
476
R. Vojvoda
In this State or on Long Island alone, the sooner you are
going to get rid of another problem. I know you have power-
ful lobbies, but I think there have been a few States in the
West that have banned detergents, and I give them a lot of
credit for it.
As a final statement, if there is anything good
that is going to come out of these meetings that you have
here -- and I am glad I could make it today -- we were
supposed to go to a CD meeting, but I think this is a little
more important -- I would suggest that you get a committee
of working people. Please don't get names who just want
to have their names in the paper again. Get a committee
13ke I set up on this duck problem, people who would drop
everything and go off to Albany or anywhere else and work to
solve the problem. Get all these people in one room,
representing everybody -- conservation, even the political
aspects of it -- because, believe me, as Supervisors, we
know all the problems, and we would like to answer all these
problems, and we want to be a part of it,
I just feel that possibly today maybe one good
thing will come out of this meeting, that you will set up
a coordinating committee — call it what you want. Don't
make it too big because you are going to have problems, but
get people who are workers, and don't get publicity seekers.
Thank you, gentlemen.
-------
h77
MR, STEIN: Thank you very much, sir.
You know, where Mr. Metzler comes from in Kansas,
they don't have that "grab the bull by the horns" so much.
Out where he comes from they say, "grab the bull by the
tall and look the problem square In the face."
(Laughter.)
MR. METZLER: You've got to work on this kind of
a problem from both ends.
(Laughter.)
Of course, I am appreciative of this kind of
testimony, and with respect to the tools that we have to
attack some of these problems, with particular relation to
the boat pollution one, we have better tools now than we had
here a year ago.
With respect to the detergents, I can't help but
make a comment on this point for the detergent. It seems
to me all it does is remind you that that water was used
before, and I am not sure that I would just as soon be
reminded of this, especially where it is occurring in wells.
If I get sewage in my well, I think maybe I would like to
have a little foam to know that this water has been used
before, so I might have a little different idea than you
about detergents as such.
But you have put your finger on a very Important
-------
478
C. R. Dominy
problem as far as Long Island Is concerned, and that is
the matter of human wastes that we are putting back down in
the groundwater. We are going to have to do something about
this, and this is part of what the comprehensive studies
which you and others have worked hard to bring about here,
we are hopeful, will give us some solutions to. That is a
bad sentence, but I think we are making some progress.
Murray, I don't have any other comments at this
point.
MR. STEIN: How about you, Mr. Klashman?
MR. KLASHMAN: No, I don't have any.
MR. STEIN: I think we have proceeded very well.
MR. METZLER; I have an added speaker, if I may,
Mr. Charles R. Dominy, Supervisor of the Town of Brookhaven.
STATEMENT OP CHARLES R. DOMINY, SUPERVISOR,
TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN
MR. DOMINY: Gentlemen, I would like to take
this opportunity to welcome you here.
My invitation, along with others, I guess, got
lost in the United States mails, because it got to me very
late.
Unfortunately, the job of Supervisor entails
-------
479
C. R. Dominy
other things than coming to meetings, so I did not get here
in time, I was not here at all yesterday, but I understand
the county was represented by the County Executive, but
we most certainly don't agree on a lot of what he says.
(Laughter.)
However, I would like to thank you for coming here
and having your conference, because I think it has been very
beneficial.
I have heard most of the statements that were
made today, before. I am aware of the population growth
in the Town of Brookhaven, probably the fastest growing town
in the country, let alone the State, and I am sure that we
in local government are as aware of these problems as most
people would like to say we are not.
I think that the results of your conference can
be very beneficial, and I am appreciative that you, the
Federal Government and the State government, finally saw
fit to get into Great South Bay pollution, because as of
December last year, in cooperation with Dr. Leone, after
attending the Pure Waters Conference in Albany, we were
informed that Great South Bay did not qualify under that
particular bill. Under this new setup in the Federal Govern-
ment, maybe we will qualify and something constructive will
be done.
-------
480
C. R. Dominy
Thank you.
MR. METZLER: I would like to clarify this point;
I am a.newcomer to New York, as you may not have learned.
I have been here three months now, and I am Interested in
what you were requesting, and how you felt that you did not
get a satisfactory answer as far as your need here complying
with the provisions of the Pure Waters Program is concerned.
MR. DOMINY: I have a letter. I was told by Dr.
Ingraham to contact Dr. Leone of the Suffolk County Health
Department.
Dr. Leone is here and he can verify this, because
I have the letters here that he wrote and I wrote. We asked,
in the first instance, for some of this money to be applied,
as Mr. Barbash said this morning, to taking all of these
studies that have gathered dust in various libraries and
putting them on one table and getting them together and
coming up with an answer. We were told, and probably right-
fully so, that we did not qualify under the bill as it was
then interpreted.
We followed that up with various letters through
Dr. Leone's office, because this, as I was told by Dr.
Ingraham, was the only avenue of approach, and I have the
letters here, if you would like to see them.
MR. METZLER: Was this for a comprehensive sewage
-------
H8l
C. R. Dominy
study?
MR. DOMINY: No, sir.
MR. METZLER: A comprehensive water supply study?
MR. DOMINY: No, sir. This was just to study the
pollution problem or Great South Bay that has affected the
duck farmers, the oyster growers, clam growers, and every-
thing else, because we have been aware of this problem for
several years.
MR. METZLER: I certainly do not want to indicate
that you folks have not been aware of this problem.
I am just puzzled, because one of the things that
is very constructive about this new set of laws under which
we are operating is the concept of comprehensive attack on
a problem, not a solution for each individual little waste
outlet, but a single solution for a whole group of waste
outlets. This is what the studies which are now under way
both in the sewage field and in water, are aimed at doing,
and I had hoped that these might meet your need.
If they don't, or if there is some area of
uncertainty here, some place in which we are failing to
be responsive, then I would like afterward, if I could, to
visit with you briefly, sir, and find out what these are,
so that perhaps we can correct it.
MR. DOMINY: I think your presence here today has
-------
482
C. R. Dominy
shown that the interpretation as handed to us in 1965, has
been slightly modified, because otherwise you would not be
here.
I am very happy that at this late date, I am at
least informed of it by a public hearing in the area.
Thank you very much.
MR. STEIN: This is what makes the job so
interesting, that we hear these various views.
I do think there is a part of a problem. The
Supervisor from Riverhead indicated what the situation is.
If we just don't operate like the cattlemen and the sheepmen
used to do years ago, and if we can get together and work on
this, I think we may very well come up with a solution.
Now, I too am a little puzzled. We work very
closely with New York State. The question of getting collated
studies and going through the literature is something, if that
has not been done, that I know we would both be delighted to
support.
In Mr. DePalco's report, which you heard from the
Federal Government, and Mr. Hennlgan's report, that you heard
from the State, as far as I can see, they both tried to do
that.
If this did not cover the field, and if our
-------
'133
C. R. Dominy
transcript here and what we come out with does not give you
a complete compendium and there has to be some more material
that has to be gone over, I am sure that Mr. Metzler and we
would be most willing to sit down with you, put our resources
in and get this done.
MR. DOMINY: I like that expression, because we
have been doing just that.
MR. STEIN: Thank you. Are we about set?
MR. DOMINY: I again thank you for coming to the
Town of Brookhaven.
MR. STEIN: We thank you.
How, we do not want to hold you too long, but I
think the conferees would like to recess for about ten
minutes, after which we will reconvene the conference, when,
I believe, we will be able to have a fairly definitive
announcement and wrap this up.
V/e stand recessed for ten minutes.
(Whereupon a recess was had.)
-------
Closing Statements
484
MR. STEIN: May we reconvene?
I am pleased to announce that the conferees
representing the State and the Federal Government have
come to unanimous conclusions and recommendations on this
matter.
1. The conferees believe, after hearing all
the statements and evaluating the testimony, the answers
and conclusions, that the waters considered here are
polluted.
That the pollution of these waters substantially
interferes with the shellfish Industry in the shipment and
marketing of shellfish in interstate commerce.
That the remedial measures taken to abate the
pollution to date have not been adequate, and the nature
of delays in abating the pollution shows that they are due
to the very complicated nature of the problem and the
tremendous growth of the community in terms of population.
The conferees do believe that this problem is
amenable to a solution, that we can have multiple uses of
the water, and there is nothing to indicate that you cannot
have your people, your duck farms or your shellfish people,
get together if we all put our minds to it.
I know we have our personal prejudices and our
-------
485
Closing Statements
backgrounds, but I think if we put our minds to it, you
have enough water and enough land and enough resources and
enough ingenuity to come up with the solution. You can
expect full cooperation from the Federal and State people,
but you have to do that.
There is one point I would like to make clear.
That is, New York State has a rather good shellfish
protection program.
Shellfish from the open waters in this area are
perfectly fine and safe. As a matter of fact, I had a half
a dozen clams last night myself, and I expect to eat them
every chance I get. There is no question about the purity
or, in my mind, the palatability of the wonderful clams
coming from your open areas.
The question here is whether we can see that the
production will grow and open more areas. However, we
believe, in order to come up with a solution to the problem,
we have to hit the four areas we have talked about before.
1. We must come up with a comprehensive detailed
and particular plan and program, including time schedules,
to handle the total pollution control problem In this area
of Great South Bay. This will include control of pollution
from people, domestic sources and other establishments. It
will include control of pollution from your kind of unique
-------
U86
Closing Statements
Industry here, duck farming. It will include tackling the
problem of existing sludge deposits in the Bay and will
include tackling the problem of the inlets. I do believe
that all of these problems must be hit.
We also must come up and should come up with
what is the best solution here. I believe that on the
inlets and the removal of sludge, because again these are
scientific facts, once they are laid out and aired on the
table, we all can agree to do that.
What we are doing is proposing the coordinating
committee, but I want to make it very clear that the
conferees endorse the New York State orders to abate
pollution, both in the time schedule they have Incorporated
in the orders and the amount and degree of treatment
required.
TheBe are primarily, of course, as State orders,
to be enforced by the State, but now, in addition, they
become Federal requirements. We will work with the State
in every way and every manner to enforce them, and we have
the authority to do that under Federal law as well.
I know we will not have to do it, that the State
will do it under its law; but I should emphasize the orders
are in full force and effect. Don't think they are being
abrogated or being turned back for a second.
-------
487
Closing Statements
In addition to this, we do believe that if you
are going to take any action on control of inlets, this
might be given a little priority in your deliberations,
because of the time factor. Mr. Metzler indicated that he
would like to have a recommendation by October, so that we
can move on that, if possible.
What we are suggesting, and, as a matter of fact,
the conferees will put this in effect right now as they
speak, is a coordinating committee that consists of State,
Federal and local people to analyze the four points that I
have come up with, and come up with detailed recommendations
on a time schedule on those points in six months.
The committee will consist of Mr. Robert
Hennigan of the New York State Department of Health, who
will be chairman; Mr. David Wallace, Director of Marine
Fisheries in the New York State Conservation Department;
a representative of the United States Public Health Service
Shellfish Program; Mr. Mark Abelson of the Department of
the Interior, who is the Regional Coordinator of the Depart-
ment for this area, and will represent all the interests of
the Departnent of the Interior, Including ours -- the fish
and wildlife Interests, commercial interests, and so on;
a representative of the Duck Growers' Association, who should
set together and decide whom you want, because Mr. Hennigan
-------
488
Closing Statements
will be in touch with you; a representative of the shellfish
interests and a representative of the local interests.
Our recommendation is that that probably should be Dr.
Leone.
I recognize the divergent interests have to
get together in a room and come up with detailed plans and
specifications.
We want to carry out your program and your blue-
print. We will give you the staff, if you need it, and the
resources to get your data.
We are Just asking that you cone up with reason-
able determinations and decisions. We are asking within one
month that a decision and a recommendation, if possible,
be forthcoming from this group on control of inlets, so we
don*t lose another session of the Congress, and so that the
views can be coalesced. We will have all parties — and I
mean all interests — all political parties -- everyone —
coming from this area and speaking with one voice as to those
inlets.
There should be no difference. The way to get
this solved is to resolve your differences. I think the
differences can be resolved, because the answer to this is
not a politioal one or a difference In a point of view. You
all want the same thing. It la a question of coning to a
-------
489
Closing Statements
scientific determination of how it is best to preserve
those inlets to get the maximum amount of water use out of
that bay.
As far as I can see, there should be and there
is no difference between any of the groups on what you want.
It is just a question of how you do it. We are looking for
agreement, and we should have that from this group in a
month.
In six months, we should have from the group a
comprehensive report on what has to be done to clean up the
whole integrated plan of pollution — again, pollution from
people, pollution from ducks, the sludge banks or beds in
the Bay, and the inlet situation — all that in six months.
When we get that in six months, the conference
will be reconvened here at the call of the chairman. The
report again will be made available and we will listen to
comments. Then we will see if we can adopt a uniform blue-
print to go ahead, a time schedule to go ahead with it.
You can be sure as this is being done — and I suggest this
be done for now — that we will put Federal and State
resources behind it and we wixl help you in every way that
the staff will allow and that our technical resources will
allow. I think between the State and us we have considerable
technical resources. Also, the last thing I am going to
mention, more than anything else, there will be financial help.
-------
490
Closing Statements
Mr. Metzler, do you have anything to say?
MR. METZLER: There is Just one thing that I
would like to say, other than expressing my appreciation
for the patience of not only each of the witnesses who
waited for his or her turn, but for those of you who have
stayed and listened to the presentations here, and who have
already indicated your understanding of the problem and
your interest in working constructively to do something
about it.
In addition to expressing that appreciation, I
do want to point out that this is not just another conference
or another hearing. This is an enforcement conference. It
is the first step in a legal process that, once started,
can be concluded only by a solution of the problem. I am
sure that no one underestimates the authority which will
put this into effect when Mr. Stein comes here.
I am sure we don't need that authority, but,
nevertheless, I hope you will be aware that it is there.
MR. STEIN; Thank you.
Mr. Klashman?
MR. KLASHMAN: No comment.
MR. DOMINY: Par be it from me to be critical of
the decision of the committee, but I would like to point
out to you gentlemen — and I am sure you are aware of this —
-------
Ugi
Closing Statements
that you are dealing with a subdivision of the government
known as the Town of Brookhaven, which has an ownership of
a good deal of this bay bottom. We have some slight control
over it. Also, as a member of the Board of Supervisors,
if you have local participation in any types of funds, I
would think that possibly someone from local government —
and I am not promoting a Job for myself because I have no
desire to be on it — but I think you are omitting a great
scope of people of local government, where you are going to
have to get some of the backup and support.
I appreciate your money and your interest and
all this, but you are still going to have some local par-
ticipation,
MR. STEINs Pardon me. Let's continue with thiB.
At least, the thinking that we had was that we were doing
just this with Dr. Leone.
MR. DOMINY: Well, sir — and I think Dr. Leone
would be the first to say this — Dr. Leone representing the
Department of Health of Suffolk County has eleven or twelve
people to get by before he can commit the county. I would
think if this committee is going to be effective, it is
going to have to have some of the county or local officials
participate, or his job is going to be that much more
difficult.
-------
492
Closing Statements
Dr. Leone, am I putting it fairly?
MR. STEIH: If you are in agreement, do you have
any suggestion?
MR. DOMINY: I would like to discuss it. I am
not going to offer it right this minute, because it cones
a little quickly, but it should be a person of local government.
MR. STEIN: How about you?
MR. DOMINY: I said I would not like to take the
Job. I have some different plans, but I think we can give
you somebody.
MR. STEIN: Let's say that we can modify the
suggestion and expand this and have such a representative.
Can we get Mr. Rennigan in touch with you, sir?
MR. DOMINY: Yes, sir.
MR. STEIN: And after you consult, would you make
your recommendation to Mr. Hennigan?
MR. DOMINY: I would love to.
MR. STEIN: We would be delighted to have him in
the group.
MR. DOMINY: Thank you.
MR. STEIN: All right. This was not because we
did not agree with you In principle.
As usual, when you eoae down from Washington or
Albany, if you get all the nuances of the local situation
-------
A 93
Closing Statements
you are lucky. We did get almost all of them, I think.
Thank you very much.
MR. DOMINY: Thank you.
MR. STEIN: I would again like to thank you all
for coming.
I do think we have made tremendous progress in
outlining this program. We can, I am sure, if we get to
work on this, preserve the waters around here in the Great
South Bay for a multiplicity of uses.
I want to tell you this: I have not been here
for many, many yearB. I was overwhelmed by the growth that
I saw when I came out. As part of my visit, I just could not
go without getting onto your beach and looking at your bay.
Those waters are still there, but even visually in off
season I saw vestiges and erosions of degradation.
I think this is your great chance. The people are
coming and you are not going to stop them. I don't know
that we want to stop them.
Unless we make the plans and take the action now,
you are going to lose it. Let's all get together and try
to do that job.
Thank you very much.
This conference stands adjourned.
(Whereupon, at 12:55 P.m., the conference was
adjourned,)
-------
494
(The following was submitted to be added to the
record : )
LONG ISLAND FISHERMEN'S ASSOCIATION
WESTHAMPTON BEACH, L. I., N. Y. 11978
CORNELIUS POILLON, Executive Secretary
Stevens Lane
Westhampton Beach, N. Y. 11978
Tel, 516-288-1141
September 28, 1966
Mr. Murray Stein
Assistant Commissioner for Enforcement
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
Washington, D. C.
Dear Mr. Stein:
I would like to say thanks on behalf of the
members of this Association, on the way that the Federal
Water Pollution Control Enforcement Conference held in
Patchogue, N. Y., was run.
It was my understanding in talking with Mr.
Metzler that I could submit a written statement to be
included in the official records of the hearing.
Enclosed is the written statement for the
records.
-------
495
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Cornelius Poillon
Executive Secretary
* * *
The Long Island Fishermen's Association, an
association representing both the commercial fin and shell
fishermen of Long Island, New York, has over the past 30
years been fighting an uphill battle for pollution abatement
from all types of pollution being dumped into our marine
environment.
The sources of this pollution in Moriches Bay
and Great South Bay areas have been well documented by all
levels of government and also by independent agencies. The
onus of responsibility for the major part of the pollution
problem that is most harmful to the shellfish Industry has
been placed on the duck farms in the area. There are other
sources of pollution that are just as harmful to the industry.
They all have been well documented: Recreational boats,
seepage from cesspools and septic tanks, the sewerage plant
at Patchogue, and herbicides and pesticides.
The pollution has caused the large areas of
shellfish producing bay bottom to be declared uncertified
for the harvesting of shellfish for human consumption. This
is also true in other areas in the marine district of the
-------
tV96
State of New York in regard to shellfish. This has placed
an economic hardship upon the shellfishermen, who in the
past operated in these areas.
There is also the side effect of this pollution
problem that is most harmful to the shellfish industry, and
that is the overfertilization of the water by nutrients
such as phosphorus and nitrogen, which induce an excess of
water plant life that Is roost harmful to shellfish.
Cooperation is, I think, a wonderful word in its
meaning, and cooperation is needed at all levels of govern-
ment and industry if we are to get this pollution problem
solved and corrected. We have an obligation to our children
and their children not to pass on to them this polluted
water, but good, clean water, for all to use and enjoy wisely.
When and if this pollution condition is corrected in the
Moriches and Great South Bays areas with a little cooperation
and the expenditures of monies, perhaps we are setting the
general pattern for all pollution abatement throughout this
country of ours.
In closing I would like to point out that this
Association is not in favor of another inlet cut through the
barrier beach opposite Patchogue, as no one knows what damage
could or would happen to the existing shellfish beds in Great
South Bay.
Let's all work together, and with cooperation the
pollution problem can be overcome,
# # #	* U.t. aOVMNMNT PRINTING OTNC1 i IM7 0—
-------