Hi all,
I sent all this out to our DEC hoping they will approve this for a pond permit and I wanted to get some opinions on this site and whether you all think the DEC will approve. I was told I should hear back in 30-days.

There is a small unprotected outlet stream that flows through two upstream ponds of my neighbors and through what appears to be old pond site on my property. There is an old stone dam that no longer holds water although it will fill up for a few days after a big rain or snow melt as shown in the picture. In dry conditions however, there is just a small little brook that flows through the area. Any potential problems or any potential hiccup is because this stream flows into a protected Class A trout spawning stream that borders my property about 200-300 feet downstream from the existing stone dam.











What we are interested in doing is excavating the area upstream from the dam during dry conditions, enlarging and deepening it and then "repairing" this dam so that it will hold water, probably adding an earth or clay damn in front of it. We have a very reputable pond builder in the area that contributes to this site that I will reach out to perform the work if the site is approved.

One thing that makes me hopeful is a DEC forester was out at the property in 2014 and I casually mentioned the idea to him and he didn't see any issues but he was a DEC forester and now it is in the hands of the Permit office.

I'd love to hear some feedback on the site and opinions on whether or not this is a pipe dream.

I'm hoping for good news, but honestly expect the answer to be a flat out "no way". I anticipate federal involvement.

Thanks for the response and I appreciate your candor.

I'm curious what your opinion of the specific reason for the rejection would be. I know I have some wishful thinking going on here but the stream that I want to impound is NOT a protected stream and does not even show up on their (or any) map. I'm far enough away from the main stream that that isn't an issue (100 ft) and the waterway already has two ponds so the argument that an additional small pond would warm up the water really doesn't hold weight either. I'm pitching it as a restoration rather than a new project since there is an existing dam which would make adding a silt fence for the initial excavation very easy.

Why Federal involvement? The email back was:

Good afternoon (my name),

I will review this information and provide a response. These jurisdictional inquiries can take up to 30 days, although I try to get to them sooner.

Regards,

(name removed)
Deputy Regional Permit Administrator, Division of Environmental Permits

There is a growing governmental presence at the federal level, regarding private and public water. It's been a contentious topic here on the forum in the past, and while my personal view holds that the time is not yet right, I'm sure there will be further "testing of the waters", so to speak.

You are familiar with WOTUS?

I would wait and see, but my personal experience is that government bureaucracy has now impeded the efforts of private landowners to improve wildlife habitat. I say this as someone trying to convert over 100 acres of agricultural land to wildlife habitat. I may have to clear-cut woodland and start over to get around government appointee stupidity.

Better to just do it. Likely they won't find out. Looks like you could convert agricultural land by just failing to farm it. Claim physical or financial infirmity if challenged.

RAH, do like others, don't tell anyone you are looking at voting for the one that supports the people that worked so hard to get the money to build their ponds. bhh, I hope you can get er done.

Tracy

So I just read up on WOTUS. Complete and utter madness!

So what actually is going on behind the scenes of my request? Does the state agency have to reach out and get permission from the EPA/Obama administration for me to repair a dam on my own property? I mean the dam is ALREADY there. It just doesn't hold water any more.

"Complete and utter madness" captures it pretty well, also "sad".

Call your closest NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service) office. They are part of the US Dept. of Agriculture. They can be extremely helpful. They can give you a quick answer. Unless there are serious issues, they can help you navigate through the process. The biggest issue is impounding a stream. If you can find a way to divert some of the water, it will make permitting a lot easier.

When I look at the picture of the existing "dam," I don't see how it ever actually held water for an extended period of time. Are you sure it was not intended to just slow flood water which is more or less what it is still doing, if I understand correctly?

@ catmandoo - thank you, I'll look into that for sure.

@ Bill D. - I don't really know if it ever really fully held water and there is some evidence it may have been a mill of some sort back in the 1700-1800's. There is so much sediment packed against the upstream side of stone "wall" however that it does seem to be holding an increasing amount of water and we do have fears of losing it at some point to a flood if it is not properly reinforced. It is a very cool part of history and part of our restoration plan is to salvage that in some way and make sure it is preserved for future generations to enjoy. My point to the DEC though is that it will continue to function in the same exact way since once it is filled, which will take about an hour or two, there will be a constant outflow that equals the inflow provided there are no leaks. Its the same way the two upstream ponds function as well.

Thought I'd post a follow up. It took about 65-days but I received word from the NY DEC today that as long as we stay 50ft away from the larger protected stream, we're good to go!