Messina went on to say the culvert and road is located in the City of Albany. As such, the town has not done a cost estimate on replacing the culvert.
"At the present time, it does not appear to me that it's a Town of Bethlehem issue," Messina said.
Slezak said he would be contacting the Town of Bethlehem to discuss the issue, but could not say which municipality is responsible for the culvert (here, the Krumkill serves as the border between Bethlehem and Albany). He said the county Soil and Water Department might act as facilitator between the municipalities to sort the issue out, if necessary.
Rick Georgeson, a DEC spokesman, said the agency does not have any jurisdictional power to require the culvert to be replaced.
"It's [the town's] call whether they want to replace that," he said. "We're going to continue to talk things over with the landowner, and be available to the town."
Georgeson said other approaches to minimizing the erosion might be effective, such as reducing the "center bar" of gravel in the river that is pushing water outwards to the banks.
While county and state officials declined to say if development upstream is affecting this stretch of the Krumkill, all said it is a possibility.
"It's pretty much understood that when you increase development there's more impervious surface," Slezak said.
On Feb. 17, The Spotlight reported a number of McKownville-based groups, along with Assemblyman John McEneny, D-Albany, are blaming development for displacing stormwater and increasing instances of flooding in that area.
Jerry is also protesting a proposed condominium development in North Bethlehem, which he believes would further exacerbate the problems with the Krumkill by adding runoff to the river. He spoke out against the project at a recent Planning Board meeting and recommended the town of Bethlehem and Guilderland halt development until further notice.