Fisheries biologists in DEC’s Regions 3 and 4 were barely finished implementing the Water Releases Legislation in the 1970s when they learned of a proposal by the NYS Power Authority to build a pumped storage, electric-generating facility on the Schoharie Reservoir in Greene County, NY.

The Power Authority named it the Prattsville Pumped Storage Project. It didn’t take long for biologists to understand the impact that a pumped storage facility would have on both Schohaire Reservoir and the Esopus Creek. 

When in the late 19th and early 20th century the New York City Department of Water Supply, Gas and Electricity determined that the Croton System would not be able to meet the future drinking water needs of Manhattan, it turned to the eastern Catskills for a new supply. Engineering studies found that the Schoharie/Esopus watersheds, when combined, would be able to meet that need. So in 1915, New York City completed construction of the Ashokan Reservoir. Then in 1926, it completed the Schoharie Reservoir. The water from Schoharie would supplement the Ashokan’s supply through diversions via the Shandaken Tunnel to the Esopus Creek. 

During the early evaluations of the upper Schoharie watershed, engineers found that there were significant deposits of red clay throughout that system. They also learned that during periods of high water, those deposits were subject to significant erosion, resulting in large volumes of turbid water flowing downstream into the Schoharie Reservoir.

With that knowledge in mind, they designed the Ashokan Reservoir with an upper and lower basin. The upper basin would serve as a settling basin for all the turbid water that would come down the Esopus Creek and end up in the upper basin of the Ashokan Reservoir.

Pumped storage facilities have an upper and lower reservoir. They are designed to use off-peak electricity to move large volumes of water from lower reservoirs to upper reservoirs, mostly during the night. Then when demand increases during the day, water in the upper reservoir is released, generating electricity that is added to the power grid. So technologically, the system pumps water into the upper reservoir at night, then when needed, the water is released, the pumps acting as electrical generators. From an engineering standpoint, these systems sound terrific. They use surplus electricity to pump water uphill and gravity to generate electricity when the water is released downhill. So what’s the problem?

As noted, the tributaries that feed the Schoharie Reservoir carry a huge silt load during and after heavy rain. All of that silt ends up in the reservoir. If there is no rain for a period of time, a lot of that silt settles out and the reservoir clears. 

This is what would happen if a pump storage facility were approved and became operational on the Schoharie Reservoir. Since water would constantly be moving between the upper and lower reservoirs, the silt would stay in solution, causing the Schoharie Reservoir to remain off color permanently. In addition, because the water would always be on the move, the reservoir would not stratify. As a result, there would be no cool bottom water available for release to the Esopus Creek during the summer, causing high water temperatures that could negatively impact the trout population. The constant discharge of turbid water would also negatively impact the aquatic insect community of the Esopus, resulting in fewer hatches and less fishing. Trout fishermen do not like to fish in dirty rivers, especially when there is limited insect activity. 

A constantly turbid, non-stratified Schoharie Reservoir would also have a significant negative impact on the fishery, especially on cold water species and sight feeders. The turbid water would also reduce the production of zooplankton, like water fleas, a significant source of food for small fish and rainbow trout. 

DEC biologists held a number of public meetings to make Trout Unlimited, the Theodore Gordon Fly Fishers and local sportsmen organizations aware of the project. They also advised New York State and Congressional representatives of the Power Authority’s intent. As a result, a lot of people, politicians, fishing organizations and anglers, such as Art Flick, came out against the project, which helped a great deal.

Since the proposed project dealt with the generation of electrical energy, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) had regulatory authority. The DEC’s Division of Water also had a regulatory responsibility. FERC held several hearings in Washington D.C., and DEC fisheries staff testified. At the end of the hearing process, FERC would have likely issued an operating license to the power authority for the Prattsville Pumped Storage Project. Fortunately, the DEC stepped up and declined to issue a Water Quality Certification for the project, because operation of the facility would not have met state water quality standards for turbidity. That determination killed the project. Frankly, I was very surprised when I heard that news, based on the DEC’s history of dealing with projects of this magnitude, especially those being sponsored by another state agency such as the Power Authority. 

To help demonstrate the type of permanent turbidity that the pumped storage project would have had on the Esopus Creek, I was able to arrange for a flyover with the state chopper, along with photographer John George. The photos he took after a significant rain event clearly showed what the Esopus would look like if the project had been approved permanently. Those who fish the Esopus and know the history of the river understand the impacts to the system that were prevented by the DEC’s action. Another environmental tragedy, thwarted by public outcry and the courage demonstrated by the DEC!