R e s e a rch, Education, Outre a c h Volume 18, Numbers 3 and 4

hen Peter Bergstrom of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recently visited the near An- SPOTLIGHT ON SCIENCE W napolis to check on the condition of what had been a large area of underwater grass, he was surprised at what he found. “There was almost nothing there,” he Restoring says, “a few patches the size of a patio table.” Since 1994, the grasses had been making a rem a r k a b l e comeback. Mostly widgeon grass, along with red h e a d grass, sago pondweed and wild celery, their ret u r n was at- Bay Grasses to tributed by many to improved water quality conditions br ought about in part by the Critical Areas law, which re- stricted clearance of trees near shorelines and pres u m a b l y the Chesapeake reduced runoff of sediment and nutrient pollution. More- ov e r , the Severn, unlike such rivers as the Choptank and Patuxent, does not have sewage plants discharging nutri- ent wastes, treated though they may be, into its waters. A Long Way Back “W e were patting ourselves on the back,” Bergs t r om says. Until this year, that is. What happened to the grasses? “It may have been some combination of drought and rain,” BY MERRILL LEFFLER he says. But precisely what “combination” remains open to speculation. Further down the Bay, in the higher salinity waters of , the story is reversed. Between 1993 and 1998, underwater vegetation, largely eelgrass, had contin- ued to decline until reaching a low of some 6,600 acres , down from 18,000 acres in years prior to 1993. This past ye a r , however, grass acreage expanded dramatically: the 1999 aerial survey, conducted by res e a r chers at the Vir - ginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) since the 1980s, showed more than a 60 percent gain to some 10,600 ac r es. Though factors having to do with freshwater runoff might account for the turna r ound, scientists and res o u rc e managers didn’t predict it. Eelgrass Widgeon grass Coontail The situations in the Severn River and Tangier Sound pr ovide two examples of the challenges that bay grass restoration efforts in the Chesapeake have faced over the last 20 years. Vast meadows of underwater grasses, some 600,000 acres, once flourished throughout the Chesapeake system. Water stargrass, wild celery, southern naiad, red - head grass, coontail, waterweed and muskgrass, eelgrass, widgeon grass, sago and horned pondweed and a score of others. This lush vegetation provided important habitat and food for fish, other aquatic organisms and waterfo w l . Southern naiad Redhead grass Horned pondweed At the same time, it helped promote water clarity by ab- sorbing nutrients, trapping sediments, slowing curren t s which can scour the bottom and resuspend sediments, and by producing oxygen. Except for scattered grass beds in various parts of the Bay — for instance, the Sus- quehanna Flats, areas of Eastern Bay and Mobjack Bay — much of that diversity is now gone.

A Sea Grant Publication particularly in targeting limits on Grasses, continued ru n o f f. The synthesis drew on 15 years of While restoration of submerge d res e a r ch data such as extensive moni- aquatic vegetation (SAV) has been a toring of grass beds and water quality key goal of the Pro- conditions in the Bay system where gram, its success has depended on SA V was flourishing. Grasses in lower stopping the immense volume of nu- salinity areas of the Potomac, for ex- trient and sediment runoff throu g h o u t ample, saw a res u r gence during the the Bay and its network of feeder 1980s — while not extensive, their re- st r eams, creeks and rivers. covery was strong, and accompanied Nutrients stimulate the growth of by an increase in plant diversity as algae, or phytoplankton, in spring well. In part, this recovery res u l t e d and summer — with warming water fr om the inadvertent introduction of te m p e r a t u r es and longer hours of Hydrilla verticillata, a fast-grow i n g , sunlight, algal growth can become so non-indigenous species often consid- extensive that thick blooms blanket er ed a nuisance and ref e r r ed to by vast stretches of water. This dense al- some as aquatic kudzu. “Hy d r i l l a gae, combined with sediments in started modifying shallow water envi- ru n o f f and erosion, as well as res u s - ronments,” says Bob Orth of VIMS, pended sediments churned from the “and that made it possible for other bottom, block the transmission of species to survive.” light, vital to the growth of SAV. Those positive conditions, accord- While submerged grasses are self- Water quality ing to the synthesis, relied on mini- sustaining in some areas, overall their mum water quality req u i r ements for recovery seems to have reached a pla- req u i r ements to (1) inorganic nitrogen, (2) inorga n i c teau over this last decade, ranging be- phosphorus, (3) water column light tween 60,000 and 75,000 acres a year; res t o r e grasses attenuation coefficient (a gauge of this is about a tenth of the forme r baywide have water clarity), (4) chlorophyll (an in- ac r eage and still far short of the Bay dex of algal biomass) and (5) total Pr ogram’s first tier goal of res t o r i n g pr obably become suspended solids. In other words, the 114,000 acres by 2002 to nearshore ar- technical synthesis set the standards eas that currently have only sparse or mo r e stringent that sediment and nutrient red u c t i o n no vegetation. Longer-range goals call ef forts would need to meet. for eventual restoration to the 600,000 than before their “This synthesis was a great step ac r es that once covered bottom initial declines. forward,” says Richard Batiuk of the gr ounds and in some areas helped U.S. Environmental Prot e c t i o n Hydrilla verticillata make Bay water nearly transparent to Agency. “It gave management agen- depths as much as 10 to 12 feet. cies scientifically defensible numbers Ir onically, baywide recovery of to aim for,” he says, “numbers that SA V seems stalled in a catch-22: Setting Water Quality Goals we wouldn’t have had otherwise — it healthy, sustainable bay grass commu- To develop realistic strategies for is the only reason these standards nities req u i r e good water quality con- curtailing runoff for SAV res t o r a t i o n , we r e adopted by the Chesapeake Bay ditions, especially light; meanwhile, res o u r ce management agencies need Pr ogram.” It was also an example, he good water quality conditions req u i r e specific water quality goals that they adds, of how the relationship be- healthy, sustainable bay grass commu- can aim for. In 1992, the Chesapeake tween management and science can nities. This means that bringing SAV Bay Program released Su b m e rg e d really pay off. back on a baywide scale is even more Aquatic Vegetation Habitat Require - Still, there were a number of fac- di f ficult than it would be if water ments and Restoration Ta rg e t s, a re- tors that the synthesis did not account quality were not so poor and vegeta- port that took the first steps in detail- for — while it highlighted the re- tion not so spotty. As Michael Kemp ing conditions that would prom o t e qu i r ements for salinity zones, it did of the University of Maryland Center SA V growth. not take into account diffe re n c e s for Environmental Science (UMCES) The technical synthesis, as it was among grasses adapted to low salinity Ho r n Point Laboratory and Chris Mad- called, aimed at determining mini- waters and those that grow in higher den of South Florida Water Manage- mum water quality conditions neces- salinities. It is not possible to general- ment District have written, water qual- sary for survival and propagation of ize about such req u i r ements for all ity req u i r ements to res t o r e underwater underwater grasses in the Chesa- grass species and all habitats, says grasses baywide have probably be- peake. With these conditions as the Bob Orth. “You ’ r e dealing with diffe r - come “more stringent than before goal, state and federal agencies could ent species and each is adapted to their initial declines.” then develop management policies — d i ff e rent needs of light, salinity and

2 • MARYLAND MARINE NOTES Where Have All the Grasses Gone? “W ater quality constituents alone are not Acres of Bay Grasses he Chesapeake’s underwater su f ficient to describe Tgrasses reached their low point in the early and middle SA V coverage.” 1970s after Tropical Storm Agnes deluged the Bay in 1972, sending torrents of sediment ation in SAV coverage.” How many of down its rivers and main stem. the five req u i r ements had to be met? With the immense volumes of Why did some areas consistently fr esh water and sediments came have grass but fail the water quality heavy concentrations of nitro- req u i r ements? Studies in the Potomac gen compounds, in some cases River by Rybicki and colleagues at two to three times normal lev- USGS showed that “water quality els. A report by the Chesapeake constituents alone are not suffi c i e n t Re s e a r ch Consortium in 1974 to describe SAV coverage.” In analyz- inventoried the impact and con- ing data in the be- cluded that next to oysters and tween 1983 and 1996, they have soft clams, “the ecological since found that coverage of SAV for gr oup most depressed was sub- the previous year is an important fac- me r ged aquatic plants.” Mo r e- tor in explaining the extent of cover- ov e r , this storm of the century arrived at the worst possible time, says Bob Orth of age in any given year. VIMS, in June, at the height of the grasses’ growing season. Nor did the five water quality con- But Agnes only magnified declines that had already begun more than a decade ditions account for light that actually be f o r e in many areas, particularly the upper Bay, says Mike Naylor of the Maryland reaches leaves. In many reg i o n s , Department of Natural Resources and chair of the Chesapeake Bay Program’s SAV even if enough light penetrates the Wor k g r oup. “In the 60s and 70s, there were massive changes in farming practices,” Bay’s dark waters, grasses may still he says, “with heavy use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides.” At the same time, he not “see” that light because of the adds, “waste treatment flows doubled and tripled.” In the , for in- mi c r oscopic plant growth (epiphytes) stance, where vast grass beds had begun to die off in the 1960s, res e a r chers began and sediment grains that can cover tracking immense amounts of nutrients coming in from runoff and from grou n d w a - their leaves. Epiphytes cling to leaves ter seepage, along with poorly treated wastes in sewage discharges, as major causes. and compete for nutrients and light Re s e a r ch in recent years has been detailing unexpectedly high amounts of nitrog e n — unless grazed by other orga n i s m s , fr om airborne deposits, as much as 25 percent or more of the nitrogen entering es- they can sheathe leaves and further tuarine waters like the Bay. block available light, preventing pho- Th e r e are indications of grasses ret u r ning to some areas of the Chesapeake since tosynthesis. Researchers have long the late 1970s, particularly in the upper Bay and western shore. How much of that known that epiphytic growth was a ret u r n is due to natural recovery and how much to better controls on runoff and nu- key factor in limiting light that leaves trient discharges remains an open question. A unique database may begin prov i d i n g actually absorb. Studies have shown some answers over the next few years. that in tidal fresh and low salinity re- For two decades, VIMS has been using aerial photography, taking more than gions, they can diminish light 20 to 2,000 photographs annually, to track the comings and goings of grassbeds, from 60 percent more than what is lost the Conowingo Dam on the to the mouth of the Bay. Each when light passes through water. It is ye a r , a cadre of res e a r chers and citizen volunteers tromps through some 2,300 only in the last few years, however, miles of shorelines to identify and ground truth species of grasses. With these data that scientists have been developing now in geographical information systems, VIMS has a rich lode of information that the ability to relate epiphytic grow t h may help scientists and managers clarify just what effect restoration efforts are actu- to water quality conditions. ally having. New Synthesis Refines Water nutrients. Think about all the varieties consider in developing plans for SAV Quality Goals of grass growing on your lawn,” he restoration. Over the last decade, res e a rc h e r s says. “Some want more shade, others Th e r e were also limitations to the have been tackling some of the diffi - mo r e sun; some req u i r e more fertiliz- water quality measures themselves. cult questions that the 1992 synthesis er , others less.” In other words, Orth For instance, they were unable to could not then deal with. How much says, “there are species-specific diffe r - pr edict the recovery of vegetation, light needs to reach leaves in order ences.” And these are important dif- what Nancy Rybicki of the U.S. Geo- for them to grow? In waters where fe r ences, he adds, that we need to logical Survey (USGS) calls, “the vari- light is not penetrating to the bottom,

VOLUME 18, NUMBERS 3 AND 4 • 3 Grasses, continued Understanding Grass Habitat how much of the dark water is due to suspended solids, how much to es e a r chers Michael Kemp and Laura Murray of the nutrients, how much to algae? RUMCES Horn Point Laboratory are closely tracking To address these questions for the several types of grass beds in Broad Creek on Mary- land’s Eastern Shore, exploring how habitat affe c t s purposes of management, the Chesa- the grasses’ growth and retention. Along with several peake Bay Program recently complet- graduate and summer students, the scientists take wa- ed a second technical synthesis that ter quality measurements in diffe r ent bottom area s ; consolidates much of the res e a r ch of one is dense with vegetation, mostly widgeon grass; the last ten years (see SAV Informa - another is patchy and sparsely vegetated; the third, tion on the Web). For example, about a mile away, is mostly bare sediment. In each Charles Gallegos of the Smithsonian place, along a transect that goes from the middle of En v i r onmental Research Center has the grass bed to its edge to the open water, they measure the same parameters — summarized studies on distinguishing nutrient levels, chlorophyll (a stand-in for algal biomass), suspended solids, water the diffe r ent optical properties of sus- clarity — every four hours, at low, flood, high and ebb tide. The hypothesis is that large r , denser grassbeds will be less susceptible to stres s pended sediments, algae and nutri- than sparse, patchy beds, and will improve water quality and be better able to sus- ents in the water column by how tain themselves. In Broad Creek and related studies in other salinity regimes with they absorb or reflect light. He has di ff e r ent grass species, they and Rick Bartleson, also at the UMCES Horn Point Lab, developed a set of diagnostic equa- will be quantifying these relationships. Using these measurements, they will be de- tions that can provide management veloping more refined simulation models to assess how diffe r ent spatial patterns of with diffe r ent options for targeting re- bay grass abundance influence the effects of plants on water quality. This study ductions of chlorophyll and suspend- could be especially useful for widespread transplanting programs by establishing key ed solids. While these equations do criteria that will better promote successful recovery of bottom habitats no longer not account for all factors that affe c t pr oductive as they once were. the availability of light, they offer an overall view of the magnitude of the another works for the reductions that are needed and some lower Potomac. In the SAV Information on the Web of the tradeoffs available. lower James, for in- Meanwhile, from other res e a rc h , stance, most of the Chesapeake Bay Program, synthesis draft: including studies supported in part by darkness may be com- ww w. c h e s a p e a k e b a y. n e t / t e m p o r a r y / s a v t s 2 / EP A’s Multiscale Experimental Ecosys- ing from suspended SA V overview: www.chesapeakebay.net/baygras.htm tem Research Center (MEERC) at the sediments — perha p s University of Maryland Center for En- in runoff — in contrast Maryland Department of Natural Resources: www.dnr.state. vi r onmental Science (UMCES), Mike to chlorophyll (or al- md.us/bay/sav/index.html Kemp and Rick Bartleson of the UM- gae). In the lower Po- Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences: www.vims.edu/bio/sav/ CES Horn Point Laboratory have de- tomac the bigger prob - veloped a mathematical model that lem may be algae. “We Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay: www.acb-online.org/ pr edicts epiphytic growth, or how can use the tools we savplant.htm much light reaches a leaf based on now have to make a Chesapeake Bay Foundation: www.cbf.org/library/ me a s u r ements of depth of light, total diagnosis,” says Batiuk, chesapeake_notebook/ suspended solids, and dissolved inor- “and, like a doctor, ganic nitrogen and phosphorus. write a prescription for U.S. Geological Survey: water.usgs.gov/nrp/proj.bib/sav/ Studies have shown that in mid- what we need to do.” wethome.htm and high-salinity waters, underwater It is such work that U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: www.fws.gov/r5cbfo/CBSAV.htm vegetation like eelgrass needs at least the technical synthesis 15 percent of surface sunlight to has brought together. gr ow. If we see that we are only get- “W e’ve taken a step we couldn’t take Restoration May Be Slow ting 10 percent sunlight, says Batiuk, in 1992,” says Batiuk. If the standards As much of an advance as this sec- we know we may have to red u c e in the new synthesis are adopted, ond synthesis is, there are still other ru n o f f. Is the main problem sediment, they are likely to serve as a basis for factors that can affect SAV grow t h , nutrients, algae? Though not fool- states in the Bay watershed to devel- among them, waves and sediments, pr oof, we can now provide some an- op regulations that, river by river, animal grazing and disturbance, and swers, Batiuk says. Gallegos’ equa- will place maximum discharge and pr opagation patterns, whether by seed tions can tell us how much we have ru n o f f limits. The synthesis report will or propagules, says Michael Kemp. to reduce total suspended solids or be printed and distributed after final Mo re o v e r , as Bob Orth has said, ch l o r ophyll. One strategy may fit the editorial corrections have been made. this is a system still on the edge. A lower James River, for example, while particular limiting factor, he points

4 • MARYLAND MARINE NOTES out, lies in the loss of plant biodiver- sity. It is likely, according to Orth, that before the widespread decline in Fr om the Direc t o r grasses got underway in the 1960s, which was then followed by the dev- astating impact of Tropical Storm Agnes in 1972, the Bay enjoyed — ince joining Maryland Sea Grant in 1998, I’ve had the opportunity to fill sev- and relied on — a much greater plant Seral diffe r ent roles within our program. I’ve learned not only how we func- diversity. In years of heavy rains and tion, but also our history as a member of the Chesapeake Bay community. We gr eater runoff, plants more tolerant of ar e a program built upon the efforts of Sea Grant staff, Extension faculty and, suspended sediments or lower salinity without question, our partners throughout Maryland. The interaction of these or lower light conditions might out- contributors has led to numerous accomplishments in the state, region and na- compete other less-adapted species. tion. Funding res e a r ch to answer complex problems, fostering the development “What makes things diffe r ent now of new technologies and communicating the outcomes and role of the scientific is that years ago we had many area s pr ocess are all hallmarks of Maryland Sea Grant. As I begin my tenure as Direc - that had multiple species so that in a to r , the time I’ve spent scaling the learning curve has been invaluable. It has wet year, for example, one species given me an admiration for what Sea Grant is and, perhaps more importantly, a might dominate and in another year, genuine enthusiasm for what we will be in the future. another species would. In the Honga Maryland Sea Grant’s contribution to the protection and wise use of Chesa- Ri v e r ,” says Orth, “the amount of eel peake Bay will req u i r e approaches that cross traditional boundaries and enfran- and widgeon grass and sago pond- chise new partners. Across Maryland, from concerned citizens to governm e n t weed were all abundant. What we agencies, there is a deeply held belief in the importance of restoring Chesa- see now is that many areas that had peake Bay and the importance of res e a r ch in that restoration. Maryland’s re- diverse beds no longer do.” se a r ch communities — in particular, the state’s estuarine and coastal scientists Added to the loss of diversity has — are among the finest in the world. That combination of concern and capabil- been the continuing clearance of land ity is remarkably potent. I believe strongly that Maryland Sea Grant’s grea t e s t for development, which has left many st r ength and greatest challenge is to integrate res e a r ch, outreach and education cr eeks and streams over the last 50 in ways that maximize their impact. years more vulnerable to runoff As I look to Maryland Sea Grant’s future, three words that characterize our su r ges that can overwhelm the most pr ogram come to mind — catalyst, source and platform. We should strive to adaptable species. “There are so catalyze creative activities in all of our program elements and within the com- many conduits for putting water into munities we serve. Research investments should be problem driven, and should the Bay system quickly,” says Richard balance short and long-term outcomes. We must constantly seek new ways to Batiuk. And with that water comes link res e a r ch to the Sea Grant outreach and education effort and to develop er oding land and a flood of sedi- pr ograms with our partners that advance these capabilities within the state and ments and nutrients. region. Maryland Sea Grant constantly strives to be an unbiased source of infor- One thing is certain — in order to mation. en s u r e healthy ecosystems in the Bay, We are not advocates for a particular point of view; rather we work to pro- we need to res t o r e grasses, not only vide useful information in various formats to the public, to environmental man- to the initial 114,000 acres by 2002 set agers and to industry around the Bay. One of our most important roles is to in- as a goal by the Bay Program, but to fuse science and the scientific process into the ongoing dialogue about Chesa- levels approaching those that existed peake Bay so individuals can make better-i n f o r med decisions. A key compo- be f o r e the steep declines of the 70s nent in this process lies at the level of the Sea Grant Extension Program. The began. The new synthesis will pro- tr emendous expertise and the close ties of Sea Grant Extension faculty to con- vide a better chart for guiding our ef- stituents around the Bay are essential. Finally, Maryland Sea Grant should be a forts — but will it mean that we have pl a t f o r m for interaction among numerous stakeholders. We should provide av- tu r ned the corner at last in our striv- enues for scientists, managers and others to meet and focus on important and ing to res t o r e the Bay? We can’t be em e r ging issues. We are in a wonderful position to bring together stakeholders su r e yet, but above all, we have to with diffe r ent expertise and views. keep going, says Orth, who has been The work ahead of us means making solid choices that maximize our effe c - conducting res e a r ch on SAVs since tiveness and impact. From my vantage, we must build upon our strengths and the 1970s. “Every little step we take use that foundation to help us improve. In short, to find better ways to meet makes a diffe r ence. Our job will nev- the needs of our constituents, partners and most importantly, Chesapeake Bay er be over. We must not give up.” ______and coastal Maryland. I hope you will join us as we begin the next stage of Maryland Sea Grant’s evolution. The illustrations of SAV, by Karen Ter a - mura, were published in the U.S. Army Jonathan Kramer, Direc t o r Corps of Engineers booklet Id e n t i f i c a t i o n Maryland Sea Grant Guide to Submerged Aquatic Veg e t a t i o n of the Chesapeake.

VOLUME 18, NUMBERS 3 AND 4 • 5 Video on Exotic Species Airs on Maryland TV Maryland Sea Maryland Public Television showed a 30-minute documentary Grant Seeks by Maryland Sea Grant on August 19 and 31 on exotic species in U.S. waters. Titled Alien Ocean, it is one of three Assistant Director pr oductions by the program that discuss exotic species inva- sions in marine environments. Those who missed the showing and are interes t - The Maryland Sea Grant College, a ed in the subject may want to order a VHS video copy of one of the documen- joint state-federal program located on ta r i e s . Alien Ocean is available for $24.95. The second production (12 minutes, the College Park campus of the Uni- $7.50), Exotics in the Chesapeake: Alien Estuary, discusses exotic species that versity of Maryland that funds re- have been showing up in the Chesapeake Bay. The third (9 minutes, $5.00), se a r ch, education and outreach rel a t - Exotics in the Chesapeake — Alien Rivers: The Threat of Zebra Mussels, addres s e s ed to the Chesapeake Bay, is curren t - the threat posed to the region’s rivers by the zebra mussel and how to help ly seeking an Assistant Director for keep it from spreading into the Chesapeake watershed. Re s e a r ch. Maryland Sea Grant also teamed up with the Chesapeake Bay Program and The individual selected for this the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center (SERC) to produce three fact position will lead the MDSG res e a rc h sheets about exotic species. The fact sheets are intended to provide general pr ogram; duties will include develop- ba c k g r ound on the subject for a broad audience. Titled Exotic Species in the ing requests for proposals, conduct- Chesapeake: An Introduction, Exotic Plants in the Chesapeake and Exotic Ani - ing peer reviews, monitoring pro- mals in the Chesapeake, the fact sheets are available for free. gr ess and results of funded proj e c t s , To request printed fact sheets, call (301) 405-6376; to download them from pr eparing technical and administra- the web, go to www.mdsg.umd.edu/exotics/index.html. To order videos, call tive reports and proposals, coordinat- (301) 405-6376 or visit the web at www.mdsg.umd.edu/exotics. ing program development awards, maintaining active links with the re- se a r ch and management community Study Finds Increased Atmospheric Nitrogen and participating in related educa- tional and outreach functions. The amount of atmospheric nitrogen polluting parts of the North Atlantic Ocean Qualifications for the position are Basin has increased significantly over the past three decades and parallels in- an advanced degree in the marine cr easing harmful algal bloom activity, according to a North Carolina Sea Grant sciences or a related field, pref e r a b l y study. The report, authored by Hans Pearl, a res e a r cher at the University of an earned doctorate. Experience in North Carolina Institute of Marine Sciences, and UNC graduate student David management and perfo r mance of Whitall, appeared in the June issue of the journal Am b i o . multi-disciplinary academic prog r a m s , The scientists found that atmospheric nitrogen accounted for 46 to 57 per- a working knowledge of prop o s a l cent of the total externally supplied or new nitrogen deposited in the nitrog e n - peer review proc e d u r es, several years sensitive North Atlantic Ocean Basin. The increase can be attributed to the of experience in res e a r ch, res e a rc h gr owing agricultural, urban and industrial emissions of nitrogen oxides, ammo- administration pref e r r ed. Superior nia and possibly organic nitrog e n . oral and written communications and One of the most prominent land-use changes since the late 1970s has been interpersonal skills are essential as is the rapidly growing swine and poultry industry in the Mid-Atlantic coastal plain, a commitment to developing crea t i v e according to Paerl. This has been accompanied by production of animal wastes science outreach programs. and an increase in atmospheric nitrogen from storage and land application. Ni- Applications are due on Septem- tr ogen vaporizes as ammonia from hog waste, lagoons and crop sprays. These ber 20, 2000. For more informa t i o n ammonia emissions travel downwind and are ultimately deposited in nitrog e n - on the position, check the web at sensitive waters. Researchers also found that a significant amount of the new ni- ww w . m i d - a t l a n t i c . s e a g r a n t . o rg / J o b s / tr ogen is being directly deposited on ocean surfaces, bypassing estuarine md s g _ a d r .html, or contact Susan Leet, pr ocesses that filter runoff. Maryland Sea Grant College, 0112 Skinner Hall, College Park, Maryland Maryland Sea Grant Review 20742, [email protected], (301) 405-6375. The Maryland Sea Grant College is preparing for a major program review on For more information on the October 22-26. This is part of a new system of oversight put in place by the fed- Maryland Sea Grant program, visit eral agency that funds Sea Grant, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin- the web at www.mdsg.umd.edu. istration (NOAA). This process, which will occur every four years, includes a ri g o r ous assessment by a panel of experts drawn from around the nation. Indi- viduals who wish to provide comments to this panel should direct them to the following address: Dr. Linda Kupfer, National Sea Grant Office, NOAA/ Sea Grant, R/ORI, 1315 East-West Highway, SSMC-3, Eleventh Floor, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910, [email protected].

6 • MARYLAND MARINE NOTES End Notes

Contaminants in the Bay Pr ess, 4988 Gold Leaf Drive, Mari- tem, phone (301) 713-3141, ext. 171, posa, California 95338, or visit author or Gregory Breese of the Delaware To help explain the complex issue Larry Points’s site at www.seacritters. Field Office of the U.S. Fish and of toxic, or potentially toxic, com- com. Wildlife Service, phone (302) 653- pounds in the Bay, Maryland Sea 9152, ext. 15. Grant has teamed up with the Al- liance for the Chesapeake Bay and Play the Bay Game ■ Co n t a m i n a n t the Chesapeake Bay Program to pro- En c y c l o p e d i a . The Maryland Bay Game, an inter- duce a fact sheet, Contaminants and go v e r nmental, public/private collabo- The National Park the Chesapeake. The fact sheet pro- ration, is a creative way to educate Service’s Environ - vides a basic primer on toxic chemi- ch i l d r en and motorists about the mental Contami- cals and the recent Toxics Characteri- Chesapeake. Designed to be played nants Encyclopedia summarizes envi- zation undertaken by the Chesapeake in the car while traveling from Mary- ronmental fate and effects informa - Bay Program. For a free copy of the land’s Chesapeake Bay Bridge to the tion on 118 toxic elements, com- fact sheet, contact Maryland Sea state’s top summer vacation spot, pounds and products. Entries include Grant, at (301) 405-6376 or see the Ocean City, it req u i r es players to take the 30 oil and petroleum prod u c t s web: www.mdsg.umd.edu/CB/toxics/ notice of things they see every day. A most commonly spilled into fresh and in d e x . h t m l . connection is made to the Bay to re- marine waters of the U.S., 63 other in f o r ce the message that although the pe t ro l e u m - r elated compounds, metals Children’s Books Bay may not be visible from a certain (m e r cury, cadmium, selenium), location, land uses and activities volatile organic compounds (VOCs) within the watershed affect it. and chlorinated organic solvents. Copies of Maryland Bay Game The document will be useful to booklets are distributed at the toll fa- those who need to obtain informa - cility at the Bay Bridge, where the tion on environmental contaminants activities in the booklet start. For quickly. The Encyclopedia is at mo r e information, contact Alexis ww w . n a t u re . n p s . g o v / t o x i c . Sierra Press has published a series of Grant, Special Projects Coordinator, th r ee children’s books on the natural ■ Academy 2000 Online. by phone, (410) 260-8016, e-mail The EPA’ s world of the Atlantic Coast. Aimed at gr a n t @ d n r .state.md.us, or visit the Watershed Academy has developed a older children, the beautifully de- web at www.dnr.state.md.us. distance learning program available signed books are filled with color online called Academy 2000. The photographs of birds, marine crea - course consists of a set of training tu r es found along the shore and Websites of Note modules that provide a basic, broa d ponies on Assateague Island. ■ Wes t e r n Atlantic in t r oduction to the many facets of Assateague: Island of the Wil d Sh o re b i r ds. An in- watershed management using a vari- Po n i e s tells the story of the famous teractive website — ety of Internet-based formats. Assateague ponies and how they live fo r med to promote res e a r ch, con- The time and complexity of each on their island home along the coasts servation and education about module varies, but most are at the of Maryland and Vir ginia. Ribbons of sh o r ebirds that migrate from Tie r r a college freshman level of instruction. Sand: Exploring Atlantic Beaches in - del Fuego, at the tip of South Ameri- Completing a series of 15 of these tr oduces young readers to the rich di- ca, to the Canadian Arctic — is avail- modules earns the Academy 2000 versity of life on sandy beaches. Ba r - able for use by the public for the first watershed training certificate. Several rier Islands are for the Birds ex p l o re s time this year. of these modules are still under con- Atlantic barrier island habitats from Visitors to the website, developed struction, but all 15 should be online beach to bay, while examining the by the Wes t e r n Atlantic Shorebird As- in the winter of 2000. wide and colorful array of birds that sociation (WASA) partnership, can The website courses are divided depend on the coastal environ m e n t . monitor the status of the migration in into six themes: Introd u c t i o n / O v e r - Written by naturalists Larry Points and ne a r- r eal time by observing the date view, Watershed Ecology, Wat e r s h e d An d r ea Jauck, the books provide not and location points on the migration Change, Analysis and Planning, Man- only a survey of species, but thor- maps. You can visit the website at agement Practices and Community/ ough descriptions of the environ - ww w . h o p s c o t c h . c a / s h o re b i r d s / Social Context. ments along the Atlantic coast. in d e x . h t m l . e n . For more informa t i o n , For more information, or to access To order these books ($7.95 each), contact Nina Garfield, NOAA’s Na- the Academy 2000 modules, visit visit Sierra Press online, www. tional Estuarine Research Reserve Sys- ww w . e p a . g o v / o w o w / w a t e r s h e d / na t i o n a l p a r k s u s a . c o m /, write Sierra wa c a d e m y / a c a d 2 0 0 0 . h t m l .

VOLUME 18, NUMBERS 3 AND 4 • 7 Calendar Maryland Marine Notes Volume 18, Numbers 3 and 4 May-August 2000 July 29, 2000-March 25, 2001— main web page, www.mariner.o rg / , African Americans and the or call the museum at (757) 596- Maryland Marine Notes is published six times a year by the Maryland Sea Chesapeake Exhibit 22 2 2 . Grant College for and about the marine res e a r ch, education and outreach commu- Mariners’ Museum, Newport News, October 30-November 3 — nity around the state. Vir ginia. The museum is featuring a Wetlands Workshop This newsletter is produced and fund- new exhibit titled “Waters of Despair, ed by the Maryland Sea Grant College Waters of Hope: African Americans Pr ogram, which receives support from the Atlantic City, New National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- and the Chesapeake Bay.” Drawing Jersey. The Third ministration. Managing Editor, Sandy on a vast scholarly collection, the Annual Wet l a n d s Rodgers; Contributing Editors, Jack Gree r museum will feature recordings, rare Regulatory Wor k s h o p and Merrill Leffl e r . Send items for the documents, artifacts, historic pho- will aim to increa s e newsletter to: tographs, engravings, American litera- dialogue and foster Maryland Marine Notes tu r e, ephemera, ship models, post- relationships among Maryland Sea Grant College cards, small craft and hands-on inter- 0112 Skinner Hall federal, state and local reg u l a t o r y University of Maryland active displays to weave the story of agencies, scientists and the reg u l a t e d College Park, Maryland 20742 blacks and the Chesapeake from 1750 community. Held at the Holiday Inn- (301) 405-6376, fax (301) 314-9581 to the present. Boardwalk, the workshop has a e-mail: [email protected] For more information on the ex- range of registration options. For reg - For more information about Maryland Sea hibit, which runs from July 29, 2000 istration information, contact the Wet - Grant, visit our web site: to March 25, 2001, check the mu- lands Regulatory Group, 67 Meyer www.mdsg.umd.edu/MDSG seum’s calendar on the web, www. Lane, Stafford, Vir ginia 22554, phone ma r i n e r. o rg / c a l e n d a r .html. For infor- (540) 286-0072, fax (540) 286-0073, e- mation on the museum, visit their mail rei l l y g r oup@ msn.com.

Maryland Marine Notes (c u r r ent and back issues since 1995) is also available on the web at www.mdsg.umd.edu/MarineNotes

Maryland Sea Grant College Non-Profit Org. 0112 Skinner Hall U.S.Postage University of Maryland PAID College Park, Maryland 20742 Permit No. 10 College Park, MD Address Service Requested