EPIB Careers
Development and Water Resources in the Pinelands AreaDaniel J.
Van Abs, PhD, PP/AICPAssociate Research ProfessorRutgers
University, Department of Human EcologyTeam: Oliver Stringham,
Yuling GaoTechnical Support : New Jersey Future, Pinelands
Preservation AllianceThis presentation is drawn from a recent
report prepared for New Jersey Future. I would like to acknowledge
my Rutgers team, and also the contributions to this report from
Nick Dickerson and Tim Evans of New Jersey Future, and Dr. Amy
Karpati and Rich Bizub of the Pinelands Preservation Alliance.
Chris Sturm of New Jersey Future was the project manager.1New
Jersey Future ProjectFunded by the William Penn FoundationMain
Question: What lessons can be learned from the water resources
impacts of historic and recent development in three Pinelands
growth areas?Synthesis and Analysis no field work
Funding for the study came from the William Penn Foundation. The
project focused on collecting and assessing existing information,
in part with the aid of spreadsheet and GIS analyses. We did not
conduct any field work due to budget limitations. The key question
is shown on the slide.2Project AreasMedford/Medford Lakes/Evesham -
SuburbanHammonton Historic Town CenterTuckerton/Little Egg Harbor
Coastal VillageNot all within Pinelands Area
New Jersey Future selected three project areas, as shown here.
Each represented a significantly different development pattern.
Medford and Evesham Townships are both fairly typical suburban
municipalities on the edge of the Pinelands ecosystem. Medford
Lakes developed as a residential lakes community, while Hammonton
is an historic agricultural area town center. Tuckerton, on the
east coast, is an historic fishing and boat-building community.
Both it and Little Egg Harbor now have extensive lagoon
developments that were hit hard during Hurricane Sandy.3What We
AssessedDemographicsLand use/land coverImpervious surfacesRiparian
areasFlood prone areasForest areasWetland areasGround water
rechargeProtected landsWater qualityWater availabilityWater
infrastructureBuild-out potential
We assessed a large number of water-related issues associated
with land uses and land cover, along with water quality,
availability and infrastructure. New Jersey Future provided
demographic information and build-out analyses, while the Pinelands
Preservation Alliance used a new USGS water modeling tool to assess
wetland impacts of water withdrawals.4Watershed & Municipal
Focus
The report is primarily focused on HUC14 subwatersheds as the
basis for assessment, as is appropriate for water resources issues.
However, we also looked at municipality statistics where
appropriate, such as for demographics. The Hammonton area map shows
clearly that the town is truly a town center, surrounded by
agriculture and forests. Impervious trends in the three project
areas, in the upper right, show gradual increases between 1995 and
2007, with the highest overall levels in Medford Lakes. The lower
right graph shows just one subwatershed in the Medford/Evesham
project area, where large amounts of forests shifted to urban land
in the periods from 1986-1995 and 2002-2007, but not during the two
intermediate periods.5Evidence of Development
In this map set, we show the Pinelands Management Areas relative
to the pre-1995 and post-1995 impervious surfaces for Hammonton.
The darker pink areas are newer low-density impervious surfaces,
while the dark brown are higher-density developments. Clearly much
of the new impervious cover is within the Pinelands Town area, but
some is not, indicating that some types of development were still
possible in the more stringent Pinelands Development Areas.6Forest
Losses
This map set shows forest losses, with the pink and red being
losses from 1986 on. Some of these losses are to the north, outside
of the Pinelands Area, but significant losses occur in the Rural
Development Area, showing how low density development still
eliminates significant forested areas.7Water Quality and
AvailabilityQualityGround and surface water quality harmed by land
usesSW pH, nutrients, arsenic and mercury are common issuesGW
Nitrates, sodium chloride, contaminated sitesAvailabilityWe know
what goes in (recharge)We know flows in many streamsWe know what is
usedBut how much use is too much?We compiled available information
on water quality, showing clearly that the growth areas result in
degradation of both ground and surface water quality. Again, many
of these impacts could predate the Pinelands Comprehensive
Management Plan, but still need to be addressed. Regarding water
availability, New Jersey is now grappling with the question of how
the use of unconfined, or surficial, aquifers can be used without
damaging the water table levels and surface water flows on which
wetland, ponds, lakes and stream ecosystems depend. This issue is
referred to as ecological flow goals, which to date have only been
implemented in the New Jersey Highlands Regional Master Plan, and
even there only to a limited extent. NJDEP and the Pinelands
Commission staff are reportedly looking into how recent Pinelands
Commission, USGS and NJDEP work should be used to address this
issue.8Wetlands Impacts?
Figure 4-3. Wetlands Impacts from Current Aquifer Withdrawals:
Hammonton Target Area (Source: Pinelands Preservation Alliance)Here
is one map from the Pinelands Preservation Alliance using a USGS
modeling tool. Hammonton is shown because they, of the three
project areas, are most reliant on surficial aquifers. The results
here show large scale lowering of the water table in wetlands areas
from these uses, at levels considered a concern based on Pinelands
Commission research. However, agencies have questioned whether this
model is appropriate for this use.9Utility CapacityMedford/Evesham
Critical Area #2 restrictionsHammonton Water allocation
restrictions and move to GW discharge for STPTuckerton/Little Egg
Harbor deep aquifer, but export sewageAll utilities: repair and
replacement costsSewer service areas regulated by Pinelands
Commission and NJDEP
Utility capacity issues exist in some way for all areas. Local
aquifer supplies are restricted for the Medford/Evesham area, while
Hammontons use of the surficial aquifers also has hit regulatory
limits. Medford/Evesham sewage treatment plans appear to have
sufficient capacity, while Hammonton is engaged in a major project
to shift their discharge from surface water to ground water, and
Tuckerton/Little Egg Harbor export all of their sewage to Ocean
County, which increases local water availability effects. However,
all of them face significant future costs to maintain and replace
their water infrastructure systems.10Key RecommendationsWater
Withdrawals New standards related to ecological impactsWater
Quality Expand beyond focus on nitrates in Pinelands CMPRestoration
Use redevelopment as a means of achieving restorationWatershed
Plans Address watersheds that straddle Pinelands boundariesGrowth
Area Plans address aggregate impacts of planned land uses
The report makes a number of recommendations for consideration
by state agencies, counties and municipalities. The slide shows
five of them, focused on better management of water withdrawals, a
broader set of water quality objectives, the use of redevelopment
efforts as a tool for environmental restoration, and the need for
more planning to better manage the water resources impacts of
growth areas.11Next StepsNew Jersey Future recommendationsDiscuss
with agenciesImplement over time as possible
www.njfuture.org/research-publications/research-reports/growing-smart-water-wise/
New Jersey Future took the results of our report, consulted with
a number of organizations and governments, and developed their
recommendations for consideration. They are now in the process of
discussing them with the relevant entities.12Contact Information
Daniel J. Van Abs, PhD, PP/AICPAssociate Research Professor for
Water, Society & EnvironmentDepartment of Human EcologySchool
of Environmental & Biological SciencesRutgers-The State
University of New Jersey55 Dudley Road, New Brunswick, NJ
[email protected]://humanecology.rutgers.edu/faculty.asp?fid=101