Outdoor Centers: Maryland
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Nanjemoy and Mattawoman Creek Watersheds
Defining the Indigenous Cultural Landscape for The Nanjemoy and Mattawoman Creek Watersheds Prepared By: Scott M. Strickland Virginia R. Busby Julia A. King With Contributions From: Francis Gray • Diana Harley • Mervin Savoy • Piscataway Conoy Tribe of Maryland Mark Tayac • Piscataway Indian Nation Joan Watson • Piscataway Conoy Confederacy and Subtribes Rico Newman • Barry Wilson • Choptico Band of Piscataway Indians Hope Butler • Cedarville Band of Piscataway Indians Prepared For: The National Park Service Chesapeake Bay Annapolis, Maryland St. Mary’s College of Maryland St. Mary’s City, Maryland November 2015 ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this project was to identify and represent the Indigenous Cultural Landscape for the Nanjemoy and Mattawoman creek watersheds on the north shore of the Potomac River in Charles and Prince George’s counties, Maryland. The project was undertaken as an initiative of the National Park Service Chesapeake Bay office, which supports and manages the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail. One of the goals of the Captain John Smith Trail is to interpret Native life in the Middle Atlantic in the early years of colonization by Europeans. The Indigenous Cultural Landscape (ICL) concept, developed as an important tool for identifying Native landscapes, has been incorporated into the Smith Trail’s Comprehensive Management Plan in an effort to identify Native communities along the trail as they existed in the early17th century and as they exist today. Identifying ICLs along the Smith Trail serves land and cultural conservation, education, historic preservation, and economic development goals. Identifying ICLs empowers descendant indigenous communities to participate fully in achieving these goals. -
ANS Annual Report 2018
i AUDUBON NATURALIST SOCIETY Annual Report: A Year In Review 2017-2018 1 PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE Greetings! I’m Scott Fosler, President of the Audubon Naturalist Society Board of Directors. It’s my pleasure to share with you highlights of a remarkable year for ANS. Our Education Program served the largest number of campers and had the strongest revenue outcome for summer camp in ANS history. It helped 3,500 youngsters plant and grow organic salad greens in regional public schools (200 more students than last year). Our new chemistry curriculum on water quality and nitrate pollution was rolled out to high school teachers, thanks to support from the National Park Foundation. ANS staff helped produce our first parent guide to connect children with nature, and it was featured on NBC Washington News Channel 4. Registrations for adults to explore natural areas around Washington reached nearly 2,000. In Conservation Advocacy, ANS worked for greater transparency in stormwater management, and for a final stormwater funding compromise, during a fractious battle between the Montgomery County Council and Executive. Our Creek Critters program surpassed the 10,000-users mark. And we continued our valiant work along the Route 1 Corridor in Northern Virginia. We’ve earned the trust of residents by working with faith communities to educate, train and involve them in advocating for community-oriented green infrastructure solutions to redevelopment. Scott Fosler The new deer fence is now up and already helping native plant communities flourish in Woodend Nature ANS Board President Sanctuary. Restoration plantings included 217 new native shrubs and trees. -
New State Plans Reveal Tough Path to 2025 Cleanup Goals ≈ PA Plan Admits It Falls Short of Nia, Which Submitted a Draft Plan to the Programs to Implement Them
M ay 2019 Volume 29 Number 3 New state plans reveal tough path to 2025 cleanup goals ≈ PA plan admits it falls short of nia, which submitted a draft plan to the programs to implement them. the Bay’s most important habitats for goal; NY hints it may not follow U.S. Environmental Protection Agency The agency has the ability to take juvenile crabs, fish and waterfowl. When that falls far short of its cleanup goal. New action against states that fall behind on the algae die, they draw oxygen from the theirs; ag and stormwater runoff York submitted a plan, but suggested it their goals, and pressure is mounting for water, leading to oxygen-starved dead bedevil almost all jurisdictions. did not intend to fully implement it. Pennsylvania to face consequences if it zones that put large areas of the Bay BY KARL BLANKENSHIP Other states drafted plans that meet continues to come up short. off-limits for everything from fish to In April, states submitted yet another their goals on paper. But in many cases, The region has been working to clean bottom-dwelling worms. round of roadmaps outlining how they require a nearly unprecedented up the Bay since 1983 and set its first After earlier goals were missed, the they intend to reach Chesapeake Bay increase in the amount of on-the-ground voluntary cleanup goal in 1987. It then EPA imposed a regulatory plan, called cleanup goals by 2025. But, 36 years actions that reduce polluted runoff from repeatedly established and fell short of the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum after the region committed to cleaning farms and developed lands. -
FSE Permit Numbers by Address
ADDRESS FSE NAME FACILITY ID 00 E UNIVERSITY BLVD, FY21, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND UMCP - XFINITY CENTER SOUTH CONCOURSE 50891 00 E UNIVERSITY BLVD, FY21, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND UMCP - FOOTNOTES 55245 00 E UNIVERSITY BLVD, FY21, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND UMCP - XFINITY CENTER EVENT LEVEL STANDS & PRESS P 50888 00 E UNIVERSITY BLVD, FY21, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND UMCP - XFINITY CENTER NORTH CONCOURSE 50890 00 E UNIVERSITY BLVD, FY21, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND UMCP - XFINITY PLAZA LEVEL 50892 1 BETHESDA METRO CTR, -, BETHESDA HYATT REGENCY BETHESDA 53242 1 BETHESDA METRO CTR, 000, BETHESDA BROWN BAG 66933 1 BETHESDA METRO CTR, 000, BETHESDA STARBUCKS COFFEE COMPANY 66506 1 BETHESDA METRO CTR, BETHESDA MORTON'S THE STEAK HOUSE 50528 1 DISCOVERY PL, SILVER SPRING DELGADOS CAFÉ 64722 1 GRAND CORNER AVE, GAITHERSBURG CORNER BAKERY #120 52127 1 MEDIMMUNE WAY, GAITHERSBURG ASTRAZENECA CAFÉ 66652 1 MEDIMMUNE WAY, GAITHERSBURG FLIK@ASTRAZENECA 66653 1 PRESIDENTIAL DR, FY21, COLLEGE PARK UMCP-UNIVERSITY HOUSE PRESIDENT'S EVENT CTR COMPLEX 57082 1 SCHOOL DR, MCPS COV, GAITHERSBURG FIELDS ROAD ELEMENTARY 54538 10 HIGH ST, BROOKEVILLE SALEM UNITED METHODIST CHURCH 54491 10 UPPER ROCK CIRCLE, ROCKVILLE MOM'S ORGANIC MARKET 65996 10 WATKINS PARK DR, LARGO KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN #5296 50348 100 BOARDWALK PL, GAITHERSBURG COPPER CANYON GRILL 55889 100 EDISON PARK DR, GAITHERSBURG WELL BEING CAFÉ 64892 100 LEXINGTON DR, SILVER SPRING SWEET FROG 65889 100 MONUMENT AVE, CD, OXON HILL ROYAL FARMS 66642 100 PARAMOUNT PARK DR, GAITHERSBURG HOT POT HERO 66974 100 TSCHIFFELY -
Maryland Stream Waders 10 Year Report
MARYLAND STREAM WADERS TEN YEAR (2000-2009) REPORT October 2012 Maryland Stream Waders Ten Year (2000-2009) Report Prepared for: Maryland Department of Natural Resources Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division 580 Taylor Avenue; C-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 1-877-620-8DNR (x8623) [email protected] Prepared by: Daniel Boward1 Sara Weglein1 Erik W. Leppo2 1 Maryland Department of Natural Resources Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division 580 Taylor Avenue; C-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 2 Tetra Tech, Inc. Center for Ecological Studies 400 Red Brook Boulevard, Suite 200 Owings Mills, Maryland 21117 October 2012 This page intentionally blank. Foreword This document reports on the firstt en years (2000-2009) of sampling and results for the Maryland Stream Waders (MSW) statewide volunteer stream monitoring program managed by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division (MANTA). Stream Waders data are intended to supplementt hose collected for the Maryland Biological Stream Survey (MBSS) by DNR and University of Maryland biologists. This report provides an overview oft he Program and summarizes results from the firstt en years of sampling. Acknowledgments We wish to acknowledge, first and foremost, the dedicated volunteers who collected data for this report (Appendix A): Thanks also to the following individuals for helping to make the Program a success. • The DNR Benthic Macroinvertebrate Lab staffof Neal Dziepak, Ellen Friedman, and Kerry Tebbs, for their countless hours in -
Baltimore County, Maryland 2017 Land Preservation, Parks and Recreation Plan
Baltimore County, Maryland 2017 Land Preservation, Parks and Recreation Plan As Adopted by the Baltimore County Council June 5, 2017 COUNTY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE COUNTY, MARYLAND Legislative Session 2017, Legislative Day No. 10 Resolution No. 55-17 Mr. Tom Quirk, Chairman By Request of County Executive By the County Council, May 25, 2017 A RESOLUTION to adopt the Baltimore County, Maryland 2017 Land Preservation, Parks and Recreation Plan (LPPRP) as an addendum to the Baltimore County Master Plan 2020. WHEREAS, the Baltimore County Council adopted the Baltimore County Master Plan 2020 on November 15, 2010; and WHEREAS, the Baltimore County Council adopted the 2005-2006 Baltimore County Land Preservation, Parks and Recreation Plan Update as a Baltimore County Master Plan 2020 addendum on January 20, 2015; and WHEREAS, Title 5, Subtitle 9 of the Natural Resources Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland requires a local governing body to revise its land preservation and recreation plan every five years and submit the plan to the Maryland Departments of Natural Resources and Planning for review and approval; and WHEREAS, the Baltimore County Departments of Recreation and Parks, Planning, and Environmental Protection and Sustainability worked cooperatively to draft the required 2017 Land Preservation, Parks and Recreation Plan; and WHEREAS, the Baltimore County Planning Board approved the 2017 Land Preservation, Parks and Recreation Plan on April 20, 2017; and WHEREAS, the Baltimore County Council has reviewed the amended 2017 Land Preservation, Parks and Recreation Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the County Council of Baltimore County, Maryland that the Baltimore County, Maryland 2017 Land Preservation, Parks and Recreation Plan, be and is hereby adopted and incorporated into the Baltimore County Master Plan 2020 to serve as a guide for meeting the recreation, park, and open space needs of the Citizens of Baltimore County; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this Resolution be sent to the Maryland Departments of Natural Resources and Planning. -
Localities Challenged to Meet Stormwater Reductions More Pollutants from Coal Ash
April 2019 Volume 29 Number 2 Coal ash contaminated groundwater at almost all monitored sites ≈ Sites found in MD, PA and VA; one in the Patuxent watershed was among the 10 worst in the nation. BY WHITNEY PIPKIN Just after Virginia legislators voted to end the storage of coal ash in pits where it could leach into groundwater and rivers, a report released in March revealed widespread coal-ash contami- nation in 39 states — and at more than 91 percent of the power plants moni- tored. They include sites in Maryland, Pennsylvania and Virginia. The report by Earthjustice and the Environmental Integrity Project relies on monitoring data from coal-fired power plants that an Obama era Construction crews restore Chinquapin Run in Baltimore city, moving sewer line out of a channel and stabilizing banks. regulation required them to release Trees planted along stream by volunteers were taken out, but officials say the reductions in erosion and sewage leaks for the first time in 2018. Of the 265 outweigh the loss. (Dave Harp) power plants that were impacted by the requirement, the report found that groundwater near 242 of them contained “unsafe levels” of one or Localities challenged to meet stormwater reductions more pollutants from coal ash. It also Anne Arundel and Baltimore counties localities could claim greatly increased cited a coal ash landfill in Maryland’s ≈ Critics question effectiveness said they’ve managed to avoid a similar pollution reduction credits for stream Patuxent River watershed as one of the of some methods, say MD has fate. But they only did so with help restoration projects — far beyond what 10 worst coal ash contamination cases let some places off easy. -
Master Plan for the Communities of Kensington-Wheaton
Approved and Adopted Master Plan for the Communities of Kensington-Wheaton May, 1989 ABSTRACT TITLE: Approved and Adopted Master Plan for the Communities of Kensington-Wheaton, as Amended AUTHOR: The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission SUBJECT: Master Plan for the Communities of Kensington-Wheaton DATE: May 1989 (Amended in April 1990) PLANNING AGENCY: The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission SOURCE OF COPIES: The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission 8787 Georgia Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3760 NUMBER OF PAGES: ABSTRACT: This document contains the text, with supporting maps and tables, for the Approved and Adopted Master Plan for the Communities of Kensington-Wheaton. Approved by the Plan ning Board, modified by the County Executive, and adopted by the County Council, the Plan focuses attention on the need for and challenge of planning for neighborhood stability and identity in an older, fully developed community with little infill development potential. This document incorporates the 1990 Approved and Adopted Amendment to the Master Plan for the Communities of Kensington-Wheaton,recommending retention of the existing C-2 zoning for Critical Parcels and Areas #19. See Appendix I for additional information. ------------------ ------------ APPROVED AND ADOPTED PLAN MASTER PLAN FOR THE COMMUNITIES OF KENSINGTON-WHEATON An amendment to the Master Plan for Kensington-Wheaton, Planning Area VII, 1959, as amended; the Master Plan for the Upper Northwest Branch Watershed, Part I, Zoning -
Countywide Park Trails Plan Amendment
MCPB Item #______ Date: 9/29/16 MEMORANDUM DATE: September 22, 2016 TO: Montgomery County Planning Board VIA: Michael F. Riley, Director of Parks Mitra Pedoeem, Deputy Director, Administration Dr. John E. Hench, Ph.D., Chief, Park Planning and Stewardship Division (PPSD) FROM: Charles S. Kines, AICP, Planner Coordinator (PPSD) Brooke Farquhar, Supervisor (PPSD) SUBJECT: Worksession #3, Countywide Park Trails Plan Amendment Recommended Planning Board Action Review, approve and adopt the plan amendment to be titled 2016 Countywide Park Trails Plan. (Attachment 1) Changes Made Since Public Hearing Draft Attached is the final draft of the plan amendment, including all Planning Board-requested changes from worksessions #1 and #2, as well as all appendices. Please focus your attention on the following pages and issues: 1. Page 34, added language to clarify the addition of the Northwest Branch Trail to the plan, in order to facilitate mountain biking access between US 29 (Colesville Rd) and Wheaton Regional Park. In addition, an errata sheet will be inserted in the Rachel Carson Trail Corridor Plan to reflect this change in policy. 2. Page 48, incorporating Planning Board-approved text from worksession #2, regarding policy for trail user types 3. Appendices 5, 6, 8, 10, 11 and 15. In addition, all maps now accurately reflect Planning Board direction. Trail Planning Work Program – Remainder of FY 17 Following the approval and adoption of this plan amendment, trail planning staff will perform the following tasks to implement the Plan and address other trail planning topics requested by the Planning Board: 1. Develop program of requirements for the top implementation priority for both natural and hard surface trails. -
Bond Funding
2016 Bond Bill Funding During the 2016 legislative session, the Maryland General Assembly evaluated 155 bond bill requests that totaled nearly $32.5 million. The Senate and the House each funded $7.5 million in legislative projects; individual bond bills were not acted upon by the legislature. Instead, the General Assembly amended the State Capital Budget Bill (SB 191) to specifically list the projects selected for funding. The chart below indicates the status of those bond bills funded in 2016. The "Total" column on the right indicates the total amount of funding approved for each project. House Bill Senate Bill Amount House Senate Number House Sponsor Number Senate Sponsor Project Title County Requested Initiatives Initiatives Other Total Funding 432 Clippinger 790 Ferguson Baltimore Museum of Industry Statewide 500,000 200,000 200,000 1597 Oaks 1098 Klausmeier Girl Scouts of Central Maryland Urban Program Statewide 250,000 250,000 250,000 and STEM Center 1203 C. Wilson 972 Peters Patriot Point Statewide 500,000 250,000 250,000 500,000 1635 Clippinger 563 Ferguson Port Discovery Children's Museum Statewide 500,000 200,000 300,000 500,000 478 McCray 316 McFadden Ulman Cancer Fund Home for Young Adult Statewide 200,000 200,000 200,000 Cancer Patients and Caregivers 1539 Allegany County 1045 Edwards Friends Aware Facility Allegany 150,000 75,000 75,000 Delegation 1538 Allegany County 1044 Edwards Frostburg Museum Relocation Project Allegany 150,000 50,000 50,000 100,000 Delegation 987 Allegany County 900 Edwards Lefty Grove Statue Allegany -
Watersheds.Pdf
Watershed Code Watershed Name 02130705 Aberdeen Proving Ground 02140205 Anacostia River 02140502 Antietam Creek 02130102 Assawoman Bay 02130703 Atkisson Reservoir 02130101 Atlantic Ocean 02130604 Back Creek 02130901 Back River 02130903 Baltimore Harbor 02130207 Big Annemessex River 02130606 Big Elk Creek 02130803 Bird River 02130902 Bodkin Creek 02130602 Bohemia River 02140104 Breton Bay 02131108 Brighton Dam 02120205 Broad Creek 02130701 Bush River 02130704 Bynum Run 02140207 Cabin John Creek 05020204 Casselman River 02140305 Catoctin Creek 02130106 Chincoteague Bay 02130607 Christina River 02050301 Conewago Creek 02140504 Conococheague Creek 02120204 Conowingo Dam Susq R 02130507 Corsica River 05020203 Deep Creek Lake 02120202 Deer Creek 02130204 Dividing Creek 02140304 Double Pipe Creek 02130501 Eastern Bay 02141002 Evitts Creek 02140511 Fifteen Mile Creek 02130307 Fishing Bay 02130609 Furnace Bay 02141004 Georges Creek 02140107 Gilbert Swamp 02130801 Gunpowder River 02130905 Gwynns Falls 02130401 Honga River 02130103 Isle of Wight Bay 02130904 Jones Falls 02130511 Kent Island Bay 02130504 Kent Narrows 02120201 L Susquehanna River 02130506 Langford Creek 02130907 Liberty Reservoir 02140506 Licking Creek 02130402 Little Choptank 02140505 Little Conococheague 02130605 Little Elk Creek 02130804 Little Gunpowder Falls 02131105 Little Patuxent River 02140509 Little Tonoloway Creek 05020202 Little Youghiogheny R 02130805 Loch Raven Reservoir 02139998 Lower Chesapeake Bay 02130505 Lower Chester River 02130403 Lower Choptank 02130601 Lower -
Towson University Office of Graduate Studies a STUDY of NATURE
i Towson University Office of Graduate Studies A STUDY OF NATURE PLAY SPACE SUSTAINABILITY IN THE PIEDMONT REGION OF MARYLAND by Victoria Rose Brusaferro A thesis Presented to the faculty of Towson University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Environmental Science in the Department of Environmental Science of Towson University Towson, Maryland 21252 (May, 2015) Thesis Committee: Dr. Sarah Haines Dr. Amy Trauth-Nare Dr. Brian Fath ii ii ABSTRACT Most of the United States population lives in urban areas, where heightened anthropogenic activity acts as a source of the majority of greenhouse gases (Hoornweg, 2011). Adaptive ways to deal with regional land management efforts need to be addressed in an effort to combat the effects of spreading urbanization (Roling, 1997). A positive environmental ethic is developed through children’s regular contact with nature, as well as substantial nature-based play (Bunting and Cousins, 1985). This paper proposes targeting the age when children first begin developing their bond with earth to harness a generation of environmentally conscious thinkers that will integrate sustainable practices in their behaviors and careers (Sobel, 1994). The most rapidly urbanizing region of Maryland, the Piedmont, can be studied to discern the present-day perspectives of best sustainable practices for naturalization of outdoor spaces specifically targeted to children ages four to seven years old in that area. ii Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………………………..vi