Management Plan - Section II

The Juniata River watershed is located in south-central Pennsylvania, encompassing 3,400 square miles and all or parts of Bedford, Blair, Cambria, Centre, Franklin, Fulton, Huntingdon, Juniata, Mifflin, Perry, Snyder and Somerset counties. The watershed is bordered by the West Branch of the Susquehanna on the north, the Susquehanna River on the east, the Potomac River to the south and the Ohio River to the west. Map II-1 shows the location of the Juniata watershed in reference to the location of these larger basins.

The main stem of the Juniata River forms at the confluence of two major tributaries: the Frankstown Branch of the Juniata and the Little Juniata. The Raystown Branch, the third major tributary to the Juniata River, joins the main stem a few miles downstream of its origins. All three major tributaries originate on the eastern slope of the Allegheny Front, a major ridgeline that divides waters traveling eastward into the Chesapeake Bay from waters traveling westward into the Gulf of Mexico. The Raystown Branch is the largest tributary of the Juniata River at 120 miles long and drains 964 square miles of rough mountainous country. The Frankstown branch is 45 miles long and drains 396 square miles. The Little Juniata is 32 miles long and drains 342 square miles. The main stem of the Juniata River is over 100 miles long and empties into the Susquehanna River near Duncannon, Pennsylvania. Other major tributaries include Aughwick Creek, Kishacoquillas Creek, Standing Stone Creek, and Tuscarora Creek. Map II-2 shows the Juniata watershed and outlines the seven major subbasins that comprise it. There are also over 400 named streams that make up the river basin drainage area, for a total of 6,560 total stream miles (DEP, 1989; ERRI, 1998).

The Juniata River basin lies within the Appalachian Ridge and Valley physiographic province. This region is comprised of alternating ridges and valleys generally oriented in a northeast to southwest direction. The western boundary of the watershed (its headwaters) is the Allegheny Front, which separates rivers that flow eastward towards the Susquehanna River and the Chesapeake Bay from the rivers that flow westward towards the Ohio River and eventually the Mississippi (USACOE, 1995a).

Most of the rock found in the basin is sedimentary siliclastic and carbonate rock of alternating layers of sandstone, shale, and limestone. These formations range from Ordovician through Pennsylvanian time periods (500 million years ago to 290 million years ago). A study by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) found that, in the Ridge and Valley province, 87 percent of the underlying bedrock consists of siliclastic rocks (sandstone, shale, and coal-bearing rocks) and 13 percent consists of carbonate rocks (limestone) (Risser and Siwiec, 1996).

There are two broad groups of soils generally found in the Juniata River basin. The first can be associated with non-carbonate sedimentary rocks as a parent material, and the second can be associated with parent materials of carbonate sedimentary rocks. The dominant soil associations in the watershed include the following: the Hazleton-Laidig-Buchanan Association, the Berks-Weikert Association, the Hagerstown-Hublersburg Association, and the Calvin-Klinesville-Leck Kill Association (USACOE, 1995a). Map III-1 shows the major soil associations in the watershed.

Mineral resources in the basin are somewhat abundant. There is one major area of coal in the watershed, located in the Broad Top region, where Bedford, Fulton and Huntingdon Counties adjoin. All of the streams that flow off the Broad Top Plateau eventually empty into the Raystown Branch of the Juniata. Coal in the Broad Top region is a semi-bituminous coal formed around 286 to 320 million years ago during the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian Periods. Three seams of the Pennsylvanian age have been mined extensively: the Fulton, Barnett, and Kelly seams. The Fulton is the deepest, with varying depths due to extensive folds and faulting in the region. All three of these seams are located in the Allegheny Formation (Groenendaal et al, 1981). Several other types of mineral extractions have occurred in the Juniata watershed, such as sand, shale, manganese, clay, limestone, zinc, lead, iron, aluminum, and copper. Map II-4 shows the location of coal seams and limestone areas.

The highest ridges of the Juniata River basin range upward of 3,000 feet above sea level, with the highest point being Blue Knob Ridge, at 3,146 feet above sea level. The lowest point in the basin is at the confluence of the Juniata and Susquehanna Rivers at 340 feet above sea level. The average fall of the main stem Juniata River is approximately 3.2 feet per mile, whereas in the headwaters it is much steeper. Several of the streams that drain the basin, the Little Juniata and the Frankstown Branch in particular, cut diagonally through the ridges. However, the Raystown Branch follows along the steep slopes of Allegrippis Ridge and Terrace Mountain, containing many deeply entrenched meanders. The mainstem river channel width varies from 200 to 700 feet wide. Channel capacities range from 25,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) near Huntingdon to 82,000 cfs near Newport (USACOE, 1995a). Flow records for the river have been recorded since 1899, and are now published annually by the U.S. Geological Survey. Daily stream gage data is also available on the World Wide Web at http://pa.water.usgs.gov/rt-cgi/gen_tbl_pg?PAGE=2 (USGS, 1999b).

Due to their parallel alignment, the ridges of the basin have a significant local effect on temperature and precipitation. Prevailing winds are from the west and northwest. The average annual temperature is 50.6° Fahrenheit. The winters are generally cold with average monthly temperatures below freezing in December, January and February. The coldest month is January, with an average temperature of 28.9° F. The warmest month is July with an average temperature of 72.6° F. The mean annual precipitation is 39 inches (USACOE, 1995a).

The first human inhabitants in the Juniata watershed arrived approximately 11,000 years ago. These Paleo-Indians were hunter-gatherers, living in small bands. The Paleo-Indians living in present-day Pennsylvania were probably indistinguishable from other bands found throughout North America.

From about 8000 BC to 1000 BC, as the glacial period ended and arctic conditions moved further north, a new culture developed, known as the Archaic. These people were also band-organized hunter-gatherers who occupied small watersheds as their primary territories. The 25 to 50 members of a band would generally reside in their territory for their whole lives. This less mobile lifestyle was made possible by a more robust and abundant ecology. As with the Paleo-Indians, Archaic groups in Pennsylvania used similar stone tools (axes, pestles, knives, scrapers, spearpoints) as other groups throughout the eastern U.S.

The next period, the Transitional, is notable more by the technological changes that were occurring than by a particular period of time. Transitional people made broad spearpoints that are markedly different from Archaic period spearpoints. It is with Transitional groups that permanent cooking vessels are first found in the archaeological record. Also, Transitional sites are found more frequently along major rivers. Even with these distinctions, Transitional people were still very similar to Archaic people.

Around 1000 BC, the Woodland period began. It was during this time period that pottery cooking vessels were first made and tobacco smoking began. Primitive horticulture began during the Early Woodland period in the Ohio Valley and settlements grew gradually larger. From about 200 BC to 1000 AD, the Middle Woodland culture existed, characterized by differences in pottery and projectile points. In the Ohio Valley, the Hopewell peoples, or great mound builders, replaced the Adena, and were in turn replaced by the Mississippian culture. These great chiefdom societies had some influence on Pennsylvania Indians, but this influence grew less important as one traveled east.

By the Late Woodland period, tribes in Pennsylvania began to differentiate into noticeably different groups. Agriculture of corn, beans, and squash was well established, and the bow and arrow was newly used to hunt game. Increasing population led to an increase in warfare. From 1000 to 1300 AD, the Clemsons Island people resided on the floodplains and islands of the Juniata and middle Susquehanna valleys. This culture was the only one in eastern Pennsylvania to build burial mounds, one of which remains near Academia, Juniata County. After 1300 AD, various groups may have inhabited the Juniata watershed at various times. The Shenks Ferry people were found mostly throughout the lower Susquehanna, but Shenks Ferry artifacts of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries have been found all the way to the headwaters of the Juniata. The Susquehannocks, who overran the Shenks Ferry people by 1600 AD, migrated south from New York, likely moving through the Juniata watershed.

The Susquehannock were the most prosperous tribe in central Pennsylvania during the early colonial period, with settlements of up to 3000 people. They were culturally similar to the Iroquois of New York, yet their territory was eventually wrested from the Susquehannock by the Iroquois. The conflicts between the two groups were at least in part over control of the European fur trade. By 1675, most Indian tribes were utterly dependent on European goods, and their cultures were being degraded by European diseases, alcohol, land grabbing, and inter-tribal conflicts (Kent, 1994).

In the early 1700s, displaced tribes from other parts of the mid-Atlantic region, including the Delaware, Shawnee, and Tuscarora, moved to the Susquehanna and Juniata valleys at the invitation of the Iroquois confederacy. By this time, most Indian cultures were disintegrating, leading to the kinds of raids and other violent confrontations that occurred with unfortunate frequency between Indians and European settlers. By the time of the Albany Purchase in 1754, when most of western Pennsylvania was purchased from the Iroquois by the colonial government, only a few scattered Indian villages remained in the Juniata region, including present-day Lewistown.

The Juniata watershed first started to become populated by European immigrants after the purchase of the region from the Iroquois League of Six Nations and the ensuing conflict of the French and Indian Wars in the 1750s and ‘60s. Before European settlement, Native Americans used the river and a land trail known as the Juniata Path as a travel corridor to the Allegheny Mountains (Stroup, 1957). In the 1700s fur traders, explorers, and missionaries began using the well-worn trails established by the Native Americans. The first settlers were largely Scotch-Irish people who immigrated for religious reasons. They were followed by a large influx of Germans. Generally, industry and settlement remained sparse due to the isolation of the area until 1771, when the Pennsylvania Assembly declared the Juniata River a public stream and highway for navigational purposes. The Juniata River valley became a major turnpike route between the east and the west by the early 1800s. Agricultural settlements began to spring up, usually near convergences of trails or tributaries. The areas became noted for its production of grasses and grains due to the rich lime soils. Woolen mills, gristmills, flourmills, and breweries started to become the dominant industries.

The Juniata division of the Pennsylvania Main Line Canal was formally opened in November 1832, following the Juniata River from its mouth at the Susquehanna River upstream to Hollidaysburg. In 1834, the Allegheny Portage Railroad was completed, linking the canal’s Juniata and Western divisions and allowing travel all the way from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia (Fritz and Clemensen, 1992). Transportation of goods between the major markets in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh was now much easier. Iron production flourished, and population increased tremendously. For example, in Hollidaysburg, the western-most town on the Juniata division of the canal, population rose from 72 in 1831 to 3,000 in 1840 (USACOE, 1995a).

In 1854, only 20 years after the completion of the Allegheny Portage Railroad, the Pennsylvania Railroad completed its line across Pennsylvania. Three years later, the Pennsylvania legislature sold the canal to the Pennsylvania Railroad. The railroad’s owners immediately abandoned the Portage railroad, severing the Juniata division’s connection to points west of the Allegheny Ridge. Over the next 40 years, the railroad succeeded the canal as the primary form of trade and transportation. Segments gradually closed down so that by 1876, all of the Juniata division west of Huntingdon had been closed. In 1899, the final portion of the Juniata division was abandoned (Fritz and Clemensen, 1992).

The Pennsylvania Railroad actually made inroads to the Juniata watershed in 1849, opening a line from Harrisburg to Lewistown that was soon extended to McVeytown (Baer, 2000). Following the railroad’s development, communities continued to grow. Iron production began to decline in the 1870s, while coal mining, limestone quarrying and sand quarrying increased. The production of silica bricks became the dominant industry into the early 1900s. Since the early 1900s through the present day, the Juniata River basin has seen an alternation between periods of prosperity and depression.

The population of the Juniata River basin is estimated to be approximately 317,000.[1] The most populated city in the watershed is Altoona, Blair County, with more than 15 percent of the total basin population. Blair County itself contains nearly 45 percent of the total basin population. There has been only a slight increase in basin population over the past forty years, averaging about one-quarter of one percent annual growth. According to the PA State Data Center, Perry County is the third most rapidly growing county in the state according to population projections for 1990-2000. Perry County is projected to be the sixth most rapidly growing county in 2000-2010 by increasing another 10 percent (Pennsylvania State Data Center, 2000). This is most likely due to improved infrastructure between Perry County and Harrisburg. Bedford, Fulton, Huntingdon, and Juniata Counties are also projected to see a slight increase in population. The two remaining counties, Blair and Mifflin, are projected to see a decline in population. Currently, the top five most densely populated areas (population per square mile) are Mifflintown Borough, Newport Borough, the City of Altoona, Bellwood Borough, and Orbisonia Borough. Table II-1 lists the population in the watershed by county, along with projections of future change. Map II-3 displays the population ranges of townships and boroughs within the watershed.

In 1999, the average unemployment rate in Pennsylvania was 4.4 percent, down from a decade-high 7.6 percent in 1992. Counties within the Juniata watershed generally experience a higher rate of unemployment. Huntingdon County has the highest rate at about 8.5 percent. Perry and Fulton counties have the lowest rates at 3.8 and 4.2 percent respectively (PA Department of Labor and Industry, 2000). In 1998, average per capita income across the seven counties was approximately $20,240, considerably lower than the Pennsylvania average of $27,470. Table II-2 lists the 1998 per capita income figures and 1999 unemployment rates for the seven major watershed counties.

Major industries in the area include Seton Leather in Bedford County, the Altoona Hospital in Blair County, JLG industries in Fulton County, Standard Steel in Mifflin County, and Empire Kosher in Juniata County. Each of these businesses employs over 1,000 people (PA Department of Labor and Industry, 2000)

[1] The overall population of the watershed was estimated by summing all municipal populations. Municipalities with area outside of the watershed had their populations adjusted. First, the proportion of municipal area within the watershed to total municipal area was calculated. This percentage was then multiplied by the total municipal population to derive an adjusted watershed population for that municipality. This process led to the figures in the “Percent of County Population in Watershed (estimated)” column in Table II-1, which was then used to adjust the county population projections.

TABLE II-1 Watershed Population and Projected Growth
County	1980 Census Population in Watershed	1990 Census Population in Watershed	1998 Estimated Population in Watershed	2000 Projected Population in Watershed	2010 Projected Population in Watershed	Percent of County Population in Watershed (estimated)
Bedford	39,907	40,939	42,264	42,822	44,687	85.4
Blair	136,241	130,193	130,258	128,179	126,503	99.7
Fulton	3,245	3,385	3,542	3,682	3,903	24.4
Huntingdon	42,253	44,164	44,599	46,876	48,299	100
Juniata	17,499	18,664	19,955	18,844	18,968	90.3
Mifflin	46,165	45,454	46,180	45,568	44,903	98.3
Perry	11,349	12,912	13,801	14,918	16,416	31.1
Cambria	933	918	955	911	849	0.6
Centre	8,649	10,772	13,626	14,184	15,148	10.3
Franklin	711	813	867	901	921	0.7
Snyder	491	564	582	627	693	1.5
Somerset	539	532	542	535	512	0.7
Total	307,982	309,310	317,171	318,046	321,804

TABLE II-2 Income and Unemployment
County	Per Capita Income 1998	Unemployment Rate 1999 Annual Average
Bedford	$ 18,657	6.0 %
Blair	$ 22,216	4.5 %
Fulton	$ 19,830	4.2 %
Huntingdon	$ 17,491	8.5 %
Juniata	$ 19,140	5.9 %
Mifflin	$ 18,761	6.7 %
Perry	$ 21,163	3.8 %
Watershed Average	$ 20,236	5.5 %
Pennsylvania Average	$ 27,469	4.4 %

The Juniata watershed is approximately 67 percent forested, 23 percent agriculture, seven percent developed, and the rest in mine lands, water, or miscellaneous. Developed uses include residential, commercial, and industrial areas as well as utility lines, railroads, and highways. Maps II-5 and II-6 show land cover and land use in the upper and lower sections of the watershed.[1]

Most of the forestland in the Juniata watershed exists on or near the mountain ridges. These forests include oak, hickory, maple, beech, birch, elm, ash, red maple, white pine, aspen, and Virginia pine. A very large portion of the Juniata watershed has been logged. Heavy logging occurred in the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries. Most of the wood was used for charcoal, log homes, and furniture. From 1890 to the mid 1920s, most forests were completely clear-cut. Therefore, although most of the area is forested, it represents secondary successional growth. Lumbering still remains a major industry in the watershed. Major managed forestlands exist in Rothrock, Bald Eagle, Tuscarora, and Buchanan State Forests.

Agriculture is the second largest land use (23 percent) in the watershed, and is generally confined to the valley bottoms. Approximately 14 percent of this land is considered “prime farmland” and approximately 15 percent is considered to be of “statewide importance.” Prime farmland is specifically designated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture as “land that has the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing food, feed, forage, fiber, and oilseed crops and is available for these uses” (USDA, 1998). Farmland of statewide importance is not as high quality as prime farmland, but it is nevertheless valuable agricultural land.

Historically, farming has been the largest source of income for a majority of counties in the watershed. Markets range from fruit, grain, and dairy to poultry, hogs, and cattle. Agricultural land and services are decreasing throughout the watershed due to increase in population size and regional development. Of the seven main counties in the Juniata watershed, a 13 percent loss of farmland has been seen between 1958 and 1978, and another 10 percent, or 87,000 acres, was lost from 1982 to 1997 (USDA, 1997). Most of the acreage lost over the past 50 years was due to erosion and development of prime farmlands (USACOE 1995a).

Land use in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is primarily regulated at the local level. Municipalities manage growth primarily through comprehensive planning and local subdivision and zoning ordinances. Assistance is provided by county planning entities and the Governor’s Center for Local Government Services to help identify, create, and implement municipal policies. Of the 200 municipalities in the basin, a total of 45 have zoning ordinances, 63 have comprehensive plans, and 142 have subdivision ordinances (29 of those are governed by a county subdivision ordinance). Map II-7 shows the municipalities that have one or more of these land use planning tools. Table C-1 in Appendix C lists the same information for all municipalities.

[1] It should be noted that the maps do not show a seven percent level of developed land. These maps are based on 1992/93 Landsat satellite imagery data that was classified and edited by a consortium of federal agencies. Although able to identify vegetation types at a fairly high resolution (30 meters), this dataset tends to underestimate developed land uses, especially in rural residential areas or heavily forested towns (Kutz, 1999). For example, this dataset indicates that only 1.8 percent, or 4,762 acres, of Mifflin County is developed (Hughes-STX Corporation et al., 1996). Mifflin County’s own geographic information system (GIS), however, indicates that 7.5 percent, or 19,764 acres, is considered to be in developed uses (Mifflin County Planning Commission, 1999). The difference is most likely due to the methods of determining land use; the Mifflin County Mapping Department uses aerial photographs and parcel maps as well as satellite imagery, allowing them a more precise analysis of land use.

Major roads of the area include east-west access on Interstates 70 and 76, and US Routes 22, 30, and 322. North-south access includes Interstate 99, US Routes 220 and 522, and PA Routes 26 and 35. All three interstates are four-lane limited access highways. The remaining routes are generally two lane roads except for US 22/322 east of the Lewistown Narrows and US 322 west of the Lewistown Narrows, both of which are four-lane limited access highways. A number of bypasses and widening projects are scheduled to occur in the next few years, including a US 22 Water Street Bypass, a US 22/522 Lewistown Bypass, and a four-lane relocation of US 22/322 through the Lewistown Narrows. Map II-8 shows the major transportation routes and airports in the watershed.

The only large public regional airport in the watershed is the Altoona-Blair County Airport located near Martinsburg. A number of smaller county and public/private airports are dotted throughout the watershed.

The main railroad line in the Juniata watershed, the Pittsburgh Line of Norfolk Southern, follows the Juniata River upstream from its confluence with the Susquehanna River to the Little Juniata River and on into Altoona. The rail line then heads west over the Allegheny Mountains near Portage.

Major trails in the area include the Lower Trail, Link Trail, Lost Turkey Trail, Forbes Road Historical Trail, Mid-State Trail, Terrace Mountain Trail, Buffalo Valley Trail, Dunning Creek Rail Trail, Jackson Trail, Reichley Brothers Rail Trail, Tuscarora Trail, and the Thousand Steps Trail. Please see Map VI-1 for the location of these trails. A description of these trails can be found in Chapter VI.

Pennsylvania’s outstanding and unique scenic features have been identified by the Pennsylvania Topographic and Geological Survey reported in Environmental Geology Report 7 (Geyer and Bolles, 1979). The Juniata watershed contains 20 of these resources as identified below.

Blue Knob – Blue Knob is the second highest peak in Pennsylvania, and the highest peak in the Juniata River watershed. Located at 3,146 feet above sea level, this summit provides numerous lookouts located within the park. Along the base of the mountain, red siltstones and shales of the Catskill Formation (Devonian Age) may be seen along the roads and trails. Near the summit, outcrops of gray-green conglomerate of the same age are found. A balanced rock is also located near the summit.

Hogback – Located in West Providence Township, this summit is located along the Raystown Branch of the Juniata – four miles northeast of Everett. This narrow sliver of red shale, siltstone, and sandstone are of Devonian age, Catskill Formation. This summit was created by a deep meander of the Raystown Branch of the Juniata River.

Shaefer Overlook – Located in King Township on PA Route 869, this breathtaking view overlooks the Ridge and Valley province.

Arch Springs – Located in Tyrone Township, this large sinking spring flows into a collapsed cave. The water ponds up in the center and has a natural arch over it. This arch was part of the former cave system, composed of the Ordovician Loysburg formation. This spring is the eighth largest spring in Pennsylvania.

Celestine Locality – Located in Antis Township, near Bellwood, this outcrop contains irregular layers of Celestine in hard calcareous shale of the Tonoloway Formation (Silurian age). This locality is where the mineral was first discovered, named, and described.

Chimney Rocks – Located in Frankstown Township adjacent to PA Route 36 near Hollidaysburg, these vertical beds of Silurian Tonoloway Limestone form three finger-like projections skyward. Recently, Chimney Rocks Park opened and provides a view from the top of Chimney Rocks as well.

Horseshoe Curve – Located in Logan Township, the Horseshoe Curve is of historical and geologic significance. The finest display of Late Paleozoic rocks along the Allegheny Front can be found along the Pittsburgh Line of Norfolk Southern tracks. This rock section extends for more than 45,000 feet, and exposes mostly shales and sandstone that range from the Upper Devonian Lock Haven Formation, 7,000 feet up to the base of the Pennsylvanian Conemaugh Group. Historically, the Horseshoe Curve is an engineering marvel, built in 1854 by the Pennsylvania Railroad. This section of railroad traverses the Allegheny Front. This large semi-circle track has become a scenic wonder of the world. This track also overlooks the Kittanning Reservoir and Lake Altoona.

Sinking Valley Lead-Zinc Mines/Fort Roberdeau – Located in Tyrone Township, these mines served as an active lead and zinc mine to supply bullets for the American Revolutionary War. Active mining began in 1778, and General Roberdeau built the fort to protect lead miners from the Native Americans. The fort has been reconstructed on the original site.

Wopsononock Lookout – Located six miles west of Altoona in Logan Township, this overlook provides a beautiful view from the Allegheny Front of the Ridge and Valley province to the east. The elevation is 2,580 feet above sea level. The bedrock here is a Burgoon Sandstone of Mississippian age which is quite weather resistant.

Big Kettle – Located in Jackson Township, five miles northwest of Kishacoquillas Valley, this plunging anticline is made up of Tuscarora Quartzite of Silurian Age. This area has a large kettle-like formation, known as Big Kettle, on the lee side of the anticline. The Little Kettle and Treaster Kettle are also nearby. Chestnut Spring and Ross Spring flow from the base of the quartzite ridges.

Trough Creek Gorge – Trough Creek State Park is located two miles north of PA Route 994 near Newburg. This state park provides many deeply entrenched streams that follow horizontally bedded sandstones, siltstones, and conglomerates of the Pocono Formation (Mississippian age). The gorge has many waterfalls, spectacular cliffs, and three interesting geological features in the Balanced Rock, Ice Cave, and the Copperas Rock.

Pulpit Rocks – The Pulpit Rocks are northwest of Huntingdon between the State Correctional Institute and Alexandria. These sandstone pillars of Devonian age have eroded through time to form isolated pillars. Juniata College is the current landowner of this area.

Butler Knob – This “knob” of weather resistant quartzite, located west of Shirleysburg on Jacks Mountain, is one of the highest points in Huntingdon County, and provides an excellent view of the Appalachian Mountain topography.

Hawstone Overlook – Located in Milford Township, this overlook is located on PA Route 333, east of Hawstone village. This overlook provides an excellent view of the Lewistown Narrows and the Juniata River between Blue Mountain and Shade Mountain.

Concord Narrows – This water gap through Tuscarora Mountain is located at the intersection of Juniata, Huntingdon, and Franklin Counties on PA Route 75. The gap is narrow and scenic with Tuscarora quartzite of Silurian Age.

Mammoth Spring – Located in Armagh Township in the Kishacoquillas Valley this spring is the third largest in Pennsylvania and is the headwaters of Honey Creek. From the head of the cave, the spring rushes through a short and primitive gorge for the first several hundred yards of Honey Creek. Above the mouth of the spring is a dry cavern. In the early 1920’s these two caverns were open to the public and called Alexander Caverns. Because the caves have experienced significant vandalism, the current landowners have sealed the dry cave entrance, and the wet cave entrance is forbidden.

Prayer Rock – Located at the crest of Jacks Mountain in Menno and Oliver Township, this overlook provides a magnificent view of Kishacoquillas Valley. Massive outcrops of steeply dipping Tuscarora Quartzite form the ridge. The Mifflin County Federation of Men’s Bible Classes erected a monument on this site.

Juniata River Overlook – Located along US Route 22/322 seven miles north of Amity Hall, this overlook is extremely picturesque as the river meanders through a valley of Devonian red shales.

Big Knob – Located three miles southeast of East Waterford, this ridge point is located in the Tuscarora State Forest. It is composed of resistant Tuscarora Quartzite of Silurian Age. Little Knob is a similar feature nearby.

Several previous studies have been done in the Juniata River watershed. As will be seen, a majority of studies have come from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This brief overview of previous studies concentrates on the studies that have been performed on a watershed-wide basis. Please see Appendix D for excerpts from some of these studies.

Many of the earliest studies undertaken by the Army Corps of Engineers examined the potential need for flood control, particularly on the Raystown Branch of the Juniata River. The Army Corps of Engineers did two survey reports on the Susquehanna River Basin and its tributaries in 1938 and 1941. Both included plans and cost estimates for flood control impoundments and hydroelectric power development. Two dams were proposed: one for Tyrone and one for the Raystown Branch in Huntingdon. In 1948, another report on flood control for the Juniata River also cited the need for the Raystown Branch dam, as well as some additional improvements for its construction from the 1941 report. A 1961 report included an outline of a feasibility plan for the Raystown Dam. Construction of the dam began in 1968, and was completed in 1973.

In 1962, Congress adopted a resolution directing a comprehensive study of the Susquehanna River Basin, including the Juniata River. Prior to this, no basin-wide study of water resources management had ever been undertaken. Objectives were to evaluate the water resource potential of the basin, to determine the water resource requirements of the basin’s population, to analyze alternative solutions, and to recommend programs necessary to manage this valuable resource to best serve the economic and social needs of the people. This plan recommended a large number of both short term and long term efforts to improve recreation, water quality, water supply, flood control, acid mine drainage, and anadromous fish runs.

The Juniata River and Tributaries Study (1991) was conducted in response to Section 17 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1988. The study area included all 3,400 square miles of the Juniata River basin. This study identified various alternatives to reduce flood damage, including structural alternatives such as flood control reservoirs, levees, and channelization. No structural alternatives were identified that had economic benefits in excess of the economic costs. The recommended plan involved non-structural alternatives that would improve flood warning and response systems, including installation of additional rain and stream monitoring gages in selected locations.

In 1993 the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers conducted a reconnaissance study of fish restoration areas in New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. The study identified measures that could be undertaken in concert with the ongoing efforts of federal, state, local and regional governments to restore the environmental values of the basin to historic levels of anadromous fish habitat and movement. Cost estimates for the entire Susquehanna River Basin exceeded $8 million. The Baltimore District of the Corps of Engineers is collaborating with non-federal sponsors to update this study with a feasibility study.

In 1994, a Raystown Lake Project Master Plan Update was conducted in response to Section 318 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992. This plan was to update the Corps and provide a guide on how to manage and develop the natural resources of Corps-owned property in the Juniata River basin. This master plan provides a general direction for the stewardship of the natural resources along Raystown Lake. The total cost for improvements was approximately $70 million.

In March of 1996, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers completed a water management reconnaissance study for the Susquehanna River Basin. The study developed comprehensive management options for existing reservoirs in an effort to maintain and enhance aquatic resources as well as to minimize flood-related damages.

Perhaps the most relevant to this plan was a study completed by the Corps in 1995, the Juniata River Basin Reconnaissance Study. The purpose of the study was to identify water-related resource problems and to evaluate solutions to improving these problems – a form of a comprehensive management plan. The study relied heavily on available information and input from county, state, and other federal agencies working in the area (USACOE, 1995a).

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers also published a study in September of 1998, specifically about the Raystown Branch of the Juniata River. This study served as a supplement to the 1995 Reconnaissance Study. This study focused on evaluating the potential environmental effects of the growing densities of livestock within the basin, using three scenarios of increased livestock numbers. Overall analysis showed that an addition of more concentrated animal operations (CAOs) will potentially have significant environmental effects, with nutrient loading to be of major concern with the Corps because of the already eutrophic Raystown Lake. The updated plan offers 44 actions necessary to restore and protect the Raystown Branch water resources, at a cost of $175 million. No feasibility level investigations have been undertaken (in the entire Juniata watershed) due to the lack of a non-federal matching sponsor (USACOE, 1998).

A study produced by the Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC) in 1997 used multivariate statistical analyses and the EPA’s Rapid Bioassessment Protocol III to assess chemical water quality, physical habitat, and biological conditions of 60 sample sites in the Juniata River basin. Fifty-five percent of the sites supported nonimpaired biological communities. Overall, several stream reaches that were described as having highly depressed water quality and biological conditions in the late 1970s were described as having improved dramatically. However, this study showed that 31 percent of the sites were still slightly impaired, and 14 percent of the sites were moderately impaired (McGarrell, 1997).

In 1997 and 1998, the USGS published a series of water quality assessments of the Lower Susquehanna River Basin, as part of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA). One report provided information on nutrients and suspended sediment data, creating a model of concentrations and loads into the Chesapeake Bay. This study estimated that the average annual input of phosphorus into the Juniata River watershed is 9,160,000 pounds per year. Average annual load of phosphorus into the Juniata River from the watershed is 1,190,000 pounds per year, which is approximately 13 percent of total input. Average annual input of nitrogen into the Juniata River watershed is 82,900,000 pounds per year, while total annual load into the River is 16,800,000 pounds per year of nitrogen. This is approximately 20 percent of total input. Overall, the lower Susquehanna watershed provides a potential load of 390 million pounds of nitrogen and 79.5 million pounds of phosphorus to the Chesapeake Bay annually (Hainly and Loper, 1997).