DOCSLIB.ORG

An Unsustainable Path Why Maryland’S Manure Pollution Rules Are Failing to Protect the Chesapeake Bay

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Unsustainable Path Why Maryland’S Manure Pollution Rules Are Failing to Protect the Chesapeake Bay An Unsustainable Path Why Maryland’s Manure Pollution Rules Are Failing to Protect the Chesapeake Bay An Unsustainable Path Why Maryland’s Manure Pollution Rules Are Failing to Protect the Chesapeake Bay Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center Elizabeth Ridlington, Frontier Group Tommy Landers, Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center Fall 2011 Acknowledgments Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center thanks Rebecca Sutton of Environ- mental Working Group and Ron Korcak of Water Stewardship for their insightful review of this document. Thanks also to Brad Heavner of Environment America Research & Policy Center, and to Tony Dutzik and Benjamin Davis of Frontier Group for their edito- rial assistance. Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center thanks the Town Creek Foundation, Keith Campbell Foundation, Abell Foundation, Krieger Foundation, Bancroft Foundation, and the Fund for Change for making this report possible. The authors bear responsibility for any factual errors. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders or those who provided review. Copyright 2011, Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center is a 501(c)(3) organization. We are dedicated to protecting our air, water and open spaces. We investigate problems, craft solutions, educate the public and decision-makers, and help the public make their voices heard in local, state and national debates over the quality of our environment and our lives. For more information about Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center or for ad- ditional copies of this report, please visit www.environmentmaryland.org/center. Frontier Group conducts independent research and policy analysis to support a cleaner, healthier and more democratic society. Our mission is to inject accurate information and compelling ideas into public policy debates at the local, state and federal levels. For more information about Frontier Group, please visit www.frontiergroup.org. Design: Harriet Eckstein Graphic Design Cover image: Sediment plumes around Horn Point on the Choptank River, near Cambridge. Photo courtesy of Jane Thomas, IAN Image Library (ian.umces.edu/imagelibrary/). Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 4 Phosphorus Pollution Damages the Chesapeake Bay 5 The Ecosystems of the Bay Are Struggling 5 Phosphorus Pollution Comes from Activities in the Bay’s Watershed 7 Poultry Production Is a Major Source of Phosphorus in the Bay 8 Chicken Production on the Eastern Shore 8 How Phosphorus in Manure Enters the Bay 9 Phosphorus Saturation of Agricultural Land 10 Current Policies to Limit Phosphorus Pollution Are Inadequate 13 Maryland’s Current Phosphorus Management Guidelines 13 Several Authorities Agree that Maryland’s Current Approach Is Flawed 14 Policy Recommendations 19 Notes 22 The fact that Maryland’s manure management rules are flawed enjoys broad acceptance by independent scientists, regulators, and the very authors of the P-index themselves. Two different calculation methods “both indicate an over- whelming surplus of P from manure and fertilizer in all of the counties evaluated.” – from a report on Mid-Atlantic phosphorus surpluses co-authored by Tom Simpson, former chair of the Chesapeake Bay Program’s Nutrient Subcommittee EPA believes that the P-index at this time is significantly flawed and that its use in many cases is likely to result in significant over-applications of P to cropland and result in P-laden runoff to the Chesapeake Bay. – U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, on management of federal land in the Chesapeake Bay region In areas of intensive animal production, the long term goal must be to match manure [phosphorus] production with local crop [phosphorus] requirements, or to find alternative uses for the manures outside the farm boundary. – SERA-17, the Organization to Minimize Phosphorus Losses from Agriculture Executive Summary hosphorus from manure applied to algae blooms flourish briefly and then farmland is a major source of pollu- die, consuming vast amounts of oxy- Ption in the Chesapeake Bay. Inten- gen as they decay. As a result, levels sive chicken production, particularly on of dissolved oxygen in the water drop Maryland’s Eastern Shore, generates large below the concentration needed to volumes of manure. Growers and farmers support fish, crabs and oysters. often spread this manure on their fields as fertilizer, but when applied in excess, • Algae blooms block sunlight, killing the nutrients that make manure useful for underwater grasses and destroying fertilizing crops also contribute to dead valuable habitat. The bay has less than zones in the bay. half the acreage of underwater grass A number of experts and authori- needed for a healthy ecosystem. ties—including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the scientists who • Nutrient pollution, along with over- helped design Maryland’s phosphorus harvesting and disease, has hastened management rules—agree that Maryland’s the decline of major fisheries such as current approach to protecting the bay oysters and crabs. from phosphorus pollution is inadequate. Reducing phosphorus pollution is es- Pollution from agriculture accounts sential to restoring the health of the bay. for 41 percent of the phosphorus that A key step toward this goal is ending the enters the bay from Maryland. Manure practice of spreading chicken manure on contains high levels of nitrogen and phos- farmland that is likely to pollute water with phorus, making it useful as a fertilizer, but phosphorus. the ratio of nitrogen to phosphorus is such Pollution has taken a heavy toll on that if manure is applied to meet the nitro- the bay. gen requirements of a crop, phosphorus is over-applied. This excess phosphorus • A “dead zone” covers a large portion escapes from farm fields and into nearby of the bay each summer. Nutrient-fed waterways. Executive Summary Large-scale chicken growing on underestimates the extent to which Maryland’s Eastern Shore generates phosphorus may escape from a field high volumes of manure that contain into nearby water bodies through far more phosphorus than can be used subsurface water flows in some regions by crops nearby. of Maryland, especially in the marshy Eastern Shore. • The 296 million broiler chickens raised in Maryland in 2007 generated • Phosphorus may also escape from approximately 550,000 tons of “chick- fields that have seemingly safe levels of en litter,” manure mixed with bedding phosphorus—fields below the P-index and feathers. threshold—but Maryland’s current rules do little to control this source of • This chicken litter contained far more pollution. phosphorus than is required by crops in major chicken-producing counties • Application of the P-index appears in Maryland. not to be solving the problem of phosphorus pollution into the bay • Soil test data from 2002 show that from agriculture. In at least one major more than 60 percent of soil samples chicken-producing region, water from four Maryland counties—where quality has not improved since Mary- tens of millions of chickens are raised land adopted its current rules. In the annually—were saturated with phos- Choptank River, phosphorus levels phorus. At such high saturation levels, have risen by an average of 1.9 per- phosphorus is more prone to dissolve cent per year from 2000 to 2008. The in water and pollute the bay. Choptank drains parts of Caroline, Dorchester, Queen Anne’s and Talbot Maryland’s current rules allow farm- counties, where large-scale chicken ers to spread manure on fields where production generates hundreds of phosphorus is likely to run off and pol- thousands of tons of excess manure lute the bay. and there is relatively little residential development. • Maryland requires farmers to use a test called the phosphorus site index Maryland produces far more phos- (P-index) if soil is found to be over- phorus-laden manure than crops in the loaded with phosphorus. The P-index region can use. The state needs to keep was meant to be a tool that would phosphorus out of the bay, and it needs a allow farmers to evaluate the water long-term solution for ending phosphorus pollution risk of applying manure to build-up in soil. the field. • Maryland should end land applications • The P-index approach does not ad- of chicken litter that endanger the dress the state’s long-term phosphorus health of the bay by replacing the cur- problem, since it allows farmers to use rent inadequate rules for phosphorus some fields as dumping grounds for application with more effective ones. excess manure, even if they are already Maryland should phase in standards loaded with phosphorus. that prevent more phosphorus from being applied to cropland than crops • Maryland’s current P-index need. 2 An Unsustainable Path • The volume of manure in Maryland • Any alternative plan for disposing of that needs to be disposed of through chicken manure should require poul- land application must be brought into try producers such as Perdue to take balance with the amount of nutrients responsibility for the pollution that that crops need. Options include their activities produce. processing more manure into pellet- ized fertilizer and transporting more manure out of the region. Executive Summary Introduction hroughout its history, Marylanders our leaders took steps to protect the Chesa- and residents of the Chesapeake Bay peake, banning PCBs and setting stronger Tregion have had two very distinct and standards for sewage treatment plants, septic opposing relationships with the bay. systems, and industrial sources. These steps For centuries, the bay has been central have helped reduce pollution in the bay. to the economy and culture of Maryland. And yet Maryland has not seriously It has been a key transportation corridor, addressed another type of waste that is supporting economic activity and devel- polluting and degrading the bay: chicken opment. Thousands of families earned manure. Industrial-scale chicken produc- a living harvesting the bay’s bounty and tion, particularly in Maryland’s lower selling it to citizens living in the region.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mile Creek Area Limited Amendment Clarksburg Master Plan and Hyattstown Special Study Area
    Approved and Adopted July 2014 10Mile Creek Area Limited Amendment Clarksburg Master Plan and Hyattstown Special Study Area Montgomery County Planning Department M-NCPPC MongomeryPlanning.org APPROVED and ADOPTED 10 Mile Creek Area Limited Amendment Clarksburg Master Plan ans Hyattstown Special Study Area Abstract This document is a Limited Amendment to the 1994 Clarksburg Master Plan and Hyattstown Special Study Area for the Ten Mile Creek Watershed. It retains the 1994 Master Plan vision, but refines 1994 Plan recommendations to better achieve two important objectives: the creation of a well-defined corridor town that provides jobs, homes, and commercial activities; and the preservation of natural resources critical to the County’s well-being. The Amendment contains land use, zoning, transportation, parks, and historic resources recommendations for the portions of the Planning Area in the Ten Mile Creek Watershed. Source of Copies The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission 8787 Georgia Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20910 Online: www.MontgomeryPlanning.org/community/plan_areas/I270_corridor/clarksburg/ clarksburg_lim_amendment.shtm Notice to Readers An area master plan, after approval by the District Council and adoption by the Maryland- National Capital Park and Planning Commission, constitutes an amendment to The General Pl (On Wedges and Corridors) for Montgomery County. Each area master plan reflects a vision of future development that responds to the unique character of the local community within the context of a Countywide perspective. Area master plans are intended to convey land use policy for defined geographic areas and should be interpreted together with relevant Countywide functional master plans. Master plans generally look ahead about 20 years from the date of adoption.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Resources
    Gaithersburg A Character Counts! City City of Gaithersburg WATER RESOURCES A Master Plan Element February 17, 2010 2009 MASTER PLAN CITY OF GAITHERSBURG 2009 MASTER PLAN WATER RESOURCES ELEMENT Planning Commission Approval: January 20, 2010, Resolution PCR-2-10 Mayor and City Council Adoption: February 16, 2010, Resolution R-10-10 MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Mayor Sidney A. Katz Council Vice President Cathy C. Drzyzgula Jud Ashman Henry F. Marraffa, Jr. Michael A. Sesma Ryan Spiegel PLANNING COMMISSION Chair John Bauer Vice-Chair Matthew Hopkins Commissioner Lloyd S. Kaufman Commissioner Leonard J. Levy Commissioner Danielle L. Winborne Alternate Commissioner Geraldine Lanier CITY MANAGER Angel L. Jones ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Erica Shingara, former Environmental Services Director Gary Dyson, Environmental Specialist Christine Gallagher, former Environmental Assistant Meredith Strider, Environmental Assistant PLANNING AND CODE ADMINISTRATION Greg Ossont, Director, Planning & Code Administration Lauren Pruss, Planning Director Kirk Eby, GIS Planner Raymond Robinson III, Planner CIT Y CITY OF GAITHERSBURG OF GAITHERSBURG 2009 MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 2 WATER RESOURCES TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Purpose and Intent................................................................................................................ 1 2. Background.......................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Introduction.................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • From My Backyard to Our Bay an Anne Arundel County Resident’S Guide to Improving Our Environment and Protecting Our Natural Resources
    From My Backyard to Our Bay An Anne Arundel County Resident’s Guide to Improving our Environment and Protecting our Natural Resources From My Backyard to Our Bay The Chesapeake Bay is in Peril. What’s threatening the Bay? Nitrogen. Phosphorus. Sediment. These are the major pollutants responsible for the decline of water quality in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. Nitrogen and phosphorus are nutrients that are essential food in the right quantities, but too much can be lethal to the Bay. Too much nutrients spawn the growth of algae which turns the water green and can be toxic to marine life, pets, and humans. When those algae die, they rob the water of oxygen and create ―dead zones‖ where fish, oysters, clams, and crabs can’t survive. Sediment is soil that washes into the Bay when it rains. It clouds the water and prevents underwater grasses from growing. These grasses produce oxygen and provide a place for young fish and crabs to develop and thrive. So who’s responsible? Every one of us. Every drop of water that falls on Anne Arundel County will make its way to the Bay. Along the way it will pick up and carry with it the things that we put on the ground. What can I do? From My Backyard to Our Bay offers tips for living in harmony with the Bay. It highlights how you can contribute to the health of your local watershed, maintain an environmentally friendly lawn, and manage stormwater runoff, wells, and septic systems in ways that will reduce the flow of pollutants and sediment into the Bay.
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland's 2015-2019 Nonpoint Source Management Plan
    Maryland’s 2015-2019 Nonpoint Source Management Plan Department of the Environment 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 540 Baltimore MD 21230-1718 December 15, 2014 Updated August 4, 2016 Published and distributed by the Section §319(h) Nonpoint Source Program Maryland Department of the Environment 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 540 Baltimore MD 21230 Phone: 410-537-3906 Fax: 410-537-3873 Lee Currey, Director Science Services Administration Jim George, Manager Water Quality Protection and Restoration Program Ken Shanks, Chief TMDL Implementation Division Maryland’s Nonpoint Source Program is funded in part by a Section §319(h) Clean Water Act Grant from the U.S. EPA. Although this program is funded partly by U.S. EPA, the contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the opinion or position of EPA. Maryland’s 2015-2019 NPS Management Plan page ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ------ see first page(s) of each chapter for subheadings - Executive Summary - Chapter 1 – Introduction - Chapter 2 – Objectives and Milestones - Chapter 3 – Resource Assessment and Monitoring Programs - Chapter 4 – Maryland NPS Programs and Initiatives - Chapter 5 – Watershed Management to Achieve NPS Goals - Chapter 6 – Public Education, Outreach and Financial Assistance APPENDICES - Abbreviations - Maryland’s Chesapeake Bay Two-Year Milestones - Components of Maryland’s 2015-2019 Nonpoint Source Management Plan o (Documents designated as integral parts of Maryland’s NPS management plan) - Internet Sources - Milestones for Tracking Progress 2016 UPDATE LISTING - Cover
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting Maryland's Environment: a Holistic Solution Douglas F
    University of Baltimore Law Forum Volume 40 Article 3 Number 2 Spring 2010 2010 Protecting Maryland's Environment: A Holistic Solution Douglas F. Gansler Former Maryland Attorney General Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/lf Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Gansler, Douglas F. (2010) "Protecting Maryland's Environment: A Holistic Solution," University of Baltimore Law Forum: Vol. 40: No. 2, Article 3. Available at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/lf/vol40/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Baltimore Law Forum by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLE PROTECTING MARYLAND'S ENVIRONMENT: A HOLISTIC SOLUTION By: Douglas F. Gansler* I. AN ENVIRONMENTAL "AMERICA IN MINIATURE" aryland, like its nickname,l really is "America in Miniature." From M the mountainous west to the largest estuary in the United States, Maryland's variety of ecosystems provides a wealth of recreational and economic opportunities for its citizens and visitors. Whether hiking, boating, crabbing, or just enjoying the view, all Marylanders benefit from a healthy environment. However, Maryland's environment is increasingly vulnerable to damage from pollution. Many of Maryland's most threatened environments, including the Chesapeake Bay and its watersheds, are part of delicate ecosystems that are affected by pollution that does not respect political boundaries. The Bay's watersheds are endangered by upstream nutrients that eventually travel to Maryland, causing eutrophication and destruction of important marine habitat.
    [Show full text]
  • Charles County Municipal Stormwater Restoration Plan
    CHARLES COUNTY MUNICIPAL STORMWATER RESTORATION PLAN PLAN TO ACHIEVE STORMWATER WASTE LOAD ALLOCATIONS AND IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RESTORATION CHARLES COUNTY, MARYLAND DECEMBER 2017 CHARLES COUNTY MUNICIPAL STORMWATER RESTORATION PLAN P L A N T O A C HI E V E S T O R M W AT E R W A ST E LO AD A LLOCATIONS AND IM P E R V IO U S S U R F AC E R ESTORATION Compliance document for Part IV.E.2.a. and b. of MS4 Discharge Permit #11-DP-3322. DECEMBER 2017 PREPARED FOR CHARLES COUNTY, MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT 200 BALTIMORE ST. LA PLATA, MD 20646 PREPARED BY KCI TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 936 RIDGEBROOK ROAD SPARKS, MD 21152 Restoration Plan Acknowledgements This watershed restoration plan was completed as a collaborative effort between the following partners: Charles County Department of Planning and Growth Management KCI Technologies, Inc. The report was authored by the following individuals from KCI Technologies, Inc.: Susanna Brellis Mike Pieper Bill Frost, P.E. Megan Crunkleton County staff providing expertise, oversight, and review include: Karen Wiggen Charles Rice Erica Hahn Appropriate citation for the Restoration Plan is as follow: KCI Technologies, Inc. 2016. Charles County Municipal Stormwater Restoration Plan. Prepared by KCI Technologies, Inc., Sparks, Maryland for Charles County Department of Planning and Growth Management, La Plata, Maryland. Dated June 2016. For more information pertaining to the Restoration Plan, please contact: Karen Wiggen, Planner Charles County Government Department of Planning and Growth Management P.O. Box 2150 La Plata, MD 20646 301-645-0683 [email protected] And visit us on the web: www.charlescountymd.gov/watershed ii Charles County, Maryland Restoration Plan Table of Contents 1 Introduction and Background ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Downloads.Asp (Accessed September 10, 2007)
    Appendix D References Acoustical Society of America. 1983. Guide to the Evaluation of Human Exposure to Vibration in Buildings. American National Standard ANSI S3.29. Acoustical Society of America. 2005. Part 4: Noise Assessment and Prediction of Long-Term Community Response. American National Standard Quantities and Procedures for Description and Measurement of Environmental Sound, ANSI S12.9-2005/Part 4. Action Langley Park. 2007. Langley Park. http://www.langleypark.org/langleypark.html (Accessed August 9, 2007). Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. 2002. Section 106 Regulations Summary. http://www.achp.gov/106summary.html (Accessed August 2007). Alexandria Drafting Company. 1999. Street Map Book, Washington, DC. American Monthly. 1896. Historic Clean Drinking Manor. No. 3, Vol. VIII. Daughters of the American Revolution. Baltimore, MD. American Public Transit Association. January 1979. “Section 2-7, Noise and Vibration,” 1981 Guidelines for Design of Rail Transit Facilities. American Public Transportation Association. October 2009. Economic Impact of Public Transportation Investment. Glen Weisbrod and Arlee Reno. http://www.apta.com/resources/reportsandpublications/Documents/economic_impact_of_public_transport ation_investment.pdf (Accessed September 2011). American Society for Testing and Materials. 2005. Designation E 1527-05, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. West Conshohocken, PA. American Society of Civil Engineers. 2008. Predicting Train-Induced Vibrations in Multi-Story Buildings. M. Sanayei, C. R. Brett, J. A. Zapje, E. E. Unger, and E. M. Hines. American Trails. 2007. National Recreation Trails. http://americantrails.org/nationalrecreationtrails/about.htm (Accessed November 9, 2007). Anacostia Watershed Network. 2009. Anacostia Watershed Network. http://www.anacostia.net Anderson, J.R., E.E. Hardy, J.T.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality Database Design and Data Dictionary
    Water Quality Database Database Design and Data Dictionary Prepared For: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III Chesapeake Bay Program Office January 2004 BACKGROUND...........................................................................................................................................4 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................6 WATER QUALITY DATA.............................................................................................................................6 THE RELATIONAL CONCEPT ..................................................................................................................6 THE RELATIONAL DATABASE STRUCTURE ...................................................................................7 WATER QUALITY DATABASE STRUCTURE..........................................................8 PRIMARY TABLES ..........................................................................................................................................8 WQ_CRUISES ..................................................................................................................................................8 WQ_EVENT.......................................................................................................................................................8 WQ_DATA..........................................................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • CURRICULUM VITAE Calendar Year 2013
    Walter R. Boynton _____________________________________________________________________________________ CURRICULUM VITAE calendar year 2013 Walter R. Boynton Chesapeake Biological Laboratory University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science P. O. Box 38 Solomons, Maryland 20688 Phone: 410-326-7275 Fax: 410-326-7302 E-mail: [email protected] I. Education 1969 B. S. Springfield College (Biology) 1974 M. S. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Marine Sciences) 1975 Ph.D. University of Florida (Environmental Engineering) II. Professional Background 1969 - 1970 Faculty Research Assistant, University of Maryland, Natural Resources Institute, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD. 1975 - 1977 Research Associate, University of Maryland, Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD. 1978 - 1983 Assistant Professor, University of Maryland, Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD. 1987 (Apr - Oct) Sabbatical at ASKO Laboratory, University of Stockholm 1983 - 1988 Associate Professor, University of Maryland, Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD. 1988-present Professor, University of Maryland, Center for Environmental Science, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD. 1992-present Graduate Faculty, University System of Maryland. 1998-present Graduate Faculty, University of Maryland System Inter-Institutional Graduate Council. Awards and Special Recognition 1982 Awarded certificate of appreciation by Tri-County Council of Southern Maryland (Presented by Maryland Governor Harry Hughes) 1990 Nominated for the PEW Scholars in Conservation and the Environment Fellowship. 1992 Nominated for Computerworld Smithsonian Awards. Environment, Energy and Agriculture. 1997 Nominated for the PEW Scholars in Conservation and the Environment Fellowship. 1999 The CES President’s Award for Excellence in Application of Science. 2003 Distinguished Service Award, Estuarine Research Federation.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Patuxent River Sediment TMDL Restoration Plan
    Upper Patuxent River Sediment TMDL Restoration Plan Anne Arundel County, Maryland November 2016 - Final Upper Patuxent River Sediment TMDL Restoration Plan November 2016 - Final Prepared for: Anne Arundel County Department of Public Works Watershed Protection and Restoration Program 2662 Riva Road, P.O. Box 6675 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 Prepared by: KCI Technologies, Inc. 936 Ridgebrook Road Sparks, Maryland 21152 Upper Patuxent River Sediment TMDL Restoration Plan 2016 Table of Contents 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Background and Purpose .............................................................................................................. 4 1.2 TMDL Allocated and Planned Loads Summary ............................................................................. 5 1.3 Restoration Plan Elements and Structure ..................................................................................... 6 2 Watershed Characteristics ............................................................................................... 8 2.1 Watershed Delineation ................................................................................................................. 8 2.2 Upper Patuxent ............................................................................................................................. 8 2.3 Land Use/Land Cover .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CURRICULUM VITAE Calendar Year 2016
    Walter R. Boynton _____________________________________________________________________________________ CURRICULUM VITAE calendar year 2016 Walter R. Boynton Chesapeake Biological Laboratory University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science P. O. Box 38 Solomons, Maryland 20688 Phone: 410-326-7275 Fax: 410-326-7302 E-mail: [email protected] I. Education 1969 B. S. Springfield College (Biology) 1974 M. S. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Marine Sciences) 1975 Ph.D. University of Florida (Environmental Engineering) II. Professional Background 1969 - 1970 Faculty Research Assistant, University of Maryland, Natural Resources Institute, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD. 1975 - 1977 Research Associate, University of Maryland, Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD. 1978 - 1983 Assistant Professor, University of Maryland, Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD. 1987 (Apr - Oct) Sabbatical at ASKO Laboratory, University of Stockholm 1983 - 1988 Associate Professor, University of Maryland, Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD. 1988-present Professor, University of Maryland, Center for Environmental Science, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Solomons, MD. 1992-present Graduate Faculty, University System of Maryland. 1998-present Graduate Faculty, University of Maryland System Inter-Institutional Graduate Council. Awards and Special Recognition 1982 Awarded certificate of appreciation by Tri-County Council of Southern Maryland (Presented by Maryland Governor Harry Hughes) 1990 Nominated for the PEW Scholars in Conservation and the Environment Fellowship. 1992 Nominated for Computerworld Smithsonian Awards: Environment, Energy and Agriculture. 1997 Nominated for the PEW Scholars in Conservation and the Environment Fellowship. 1999 The UMCES President’s Award for Excellence in Application of Science. 2003 Distinguished Service Award, Estuarine Research Federation.
    [Show full text]
  • Potomac River Full Report
    Potomac River Water and Habitat Quality Assessment Maryland Department of Natural Resources Tidewater Ecosystem Assessment Tawes Building, D-2, 580 Taylor Avenue Annapolis, MD 21401 http://dnr.maryland.gov Toll Free in Maryland: 1-877-620-8DNR, ext: 8630 Out of state call: 410-260-8630 TTY users call via the MD Relay: 711 (within MD) Out of state call: 1-800-735-2258 Martin O’Malley, Governor Anthony G. Brown, Lt. Governor The facilities and services of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources are available to all without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, age, national origin or physical or mental disability. This document is available in alternative format upon request from a qualified individual with disability Primary Author: Renee Karrh [email protected] Contributors: Diana Domotor, Rebecca Golden, Lee Karrh, Brooke Landry, William Romano, Brian Smith, Ben Cole, Sherm Garrison, Thomas Parham, Mark Trice, Cathy Wazniak The electronic version of the report is available at http://mddnr.chesapeakebay.net/eyesonthebay/tribsums.cfm Acknowledgements: Information on the water and habitat quality of Maryland’s rivers and bays is available due to the hard work of many dedicated staff including: staff who are in the field collecting the samples year-round, sometimes under less than desirable weather conditions laboratory staff who perform the chemical tests to determine what exactly is in those water samples data management staff who collect the resulting information, confirm the accuracy and quality of the data, and organize and maintain the databases and analytical staff who interpret the data to answer the question ‘how is the river/Bay doing?’ There are too many individuals to directly name from more than 25 years of monitoring, so we simply wish to commend all of them for their commitment to collecting high quality information and making it available and useful to the citizens of Maryland.
    [Show full text]