DOCSLIB.ORG

Marine and Estuarine Finfish Ecological and Habitat Investigations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Marine and Estuarine Finfish Ecological and Habitat Investigations PERFORMANCE REPORT FOR FEDERAL AID GRANT F-63-R, SEGMENT 9 2018 MARINE AND ESTUARINE FINFISH ECOLOGICAL AND HABITAT INVESTIGATIONS DNR 17-120419-191 Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fishing and Boating Services Tawes State Office Building B-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 December, 2019 Larry Hogan Fishing and Boating Services Jeannie Haddaway-Riccio Governor Chesapeake Finfish Program Secretary Boyd Rutherford Tawes State Office Building Lt. Governor 580 Taylor Avenue Annapolis, Maryland 21401 1 State of Maryland Department of Natural Resources Larry Hogan Governor Boyd Rutherford Lt. Governor Jeannie Haddaway-Riccio Secretary Department of Natural Resources Mission For today and tomorrow, the Department of Natural Resources inspires people to enjoy and live in harmony with their environment, and to protect what makes Maryland unique – our treasured Chesapeake Bay, our diverse landscapes and our living and natural resources. Fishing and Boating Services 580 Taylor Avenue Annapolis, MD 21401 dnr.maryland.gov 1-877-620-8DNR Ext. 8305 410-260-8305 2 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 a disability. © 2004 Maryland Department of Natural Resources 3 This grant was funded by the State of Maryland Fisheries Management and Protection Fund and Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Acts (Dingell-Johnson/Wallop-Breaux) 4 Approval Lynn Waller Fegley Division Director: Stock Health, Data Management and Analysis Fishing and Boating Services Department of Natural Resources James H. Uphoff, Jr. Stock Health, Data Management and Analysis Division Fishing and Boating Services Fisheries Habitat and Ecosystem Program Department of Natural Resources 5 Acknowledgements The Maryland Department of Natural Resources and program staff would like to thank all volunteers and organizations who assisted us in 2018. Volunteer / Sampling organization Mattawoman Mattawoman Creek Watershed Society Anita Leight Bush River Estuary Center Marek Topolski Mapping MD DNR 6 Project Staff Jim Uphoff Margaret McGinty Alexis Park Carrie Hoover Marcus Patton (seasonal) Report Organization This report was completed during December, 2019. It consists of summaries of activities for Jobs 1–4 under this grant cycle. All pages are numbered sequentially; there are no separate page numbering systems for each Job. Job 1 activities are reported in separate numbered sections. For example, Job 1, section 1 would cover habitat reference points (Job 1) for stream spawning habitat of anadromous fish (Section 1). Tables in Job 1 are numbered as section number – table number (1-1, 1-2, etc). Figures are numbered in the same fashion. Throughout the report, multiple references to past annual report analyses are referred to. The complete PDF versions of many past annual reports can be found under the Publications and Report link on the Fisheries Habitat and Ecosystem (FHEP) website page on the Maryland DNR website. The website address is http://dnr.maryland.gov/fisheries/Pages/FHEP/pubs.aspx . Table 1 provides the page number for each job and section. Table 1. Job and section number, topic covered, and page number. Job Section Topic Pages 1 1-3 Executive summary 8-10 1 1-3 Background 11-16 1 1-3 Common spatial and statistical methods 17-22 1 1 Anadromous fish stream spawning habitat 23-71 1 2 Yellow Perch larval habitat 72-108 1 3 Summer fish community and habitat dynamics 109-195 1 1-3 Synthesis 196-198 2 Supporting activities 199-201 3 Spatial data for prioritizing habitat 202-222 4 Striped Bass forage benchmarks 223-283 7 STATE: MARYLAND SURVEY TITLE: MARINE AND ESTUARINE FINFISH ECOLOGICAL AND HABITAT INVESTIGATIONS PROJECT 1: HABITAT AND ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR RECREATIONALLY IMPORTANT FINFISH Job 1: Development of habitat-based reference points for recreationally important Chesapeake Bay fishes of special concern: development targets and thresholds Executive Summary Spatial Analyses - We used property tax map based counts of structures in a watershed (C), standardized to hectares (C/ha), as our indicator of development. Recalculation of the equation previously used to convert annual estimates of C/ha to estimates of impervious surface (IS) was necessary in 2018 due to a new time-series provided by MD Department of Planning, as well as inconsistencies found in the data for some watersheds up to 2002. New estimates of C/ha that were equivalent to 5% IS (target level of development for fisheries; a rural watershed), 10% IS (development threshold for a suburban watershed), and 15% IS (highly developed suburban watershed) were estimated as 0.37, 0.86, and 1.35 C/ha, respectively. Previous C/ha estimates corresponding to 5%, 10%, and 15% IS were 0.27, 0.83, and 1.59, respectively (Uphoff et al. 2018). Percent of watershed in agriculture, forest, and wetlands were estimated from Maryland Department of Planning spatial data. Section 1, Stream Ichthyoplankton - Proportion of samples with Herring eggs and-or larvae (Pherr) provided a reasonably precise indicator of habitat occupation based on encounter rate. Regression analyses that included spawning stock categories (0 for low during 2005-2011 and 1 for high during 2012-2018), indicated significant and logical relationships among Pherr, C/ha, and conductivity consistent with the hypothesis that urbanization was detrimental to stream spawning. Predicted Pherr declined by 53% over the range of observed C/ha (0.07-1.52; and increased by 55% between the two spawning stock categories. Predicted Pherr declined by 47% over the range of observed conductivity standardized to its baseline (1.14-2.19) and increased by 57% between the two spawning stock categories. The high spawning stock category in the analysis of 2005-2018 corresponded with closure of Maryland’s River Herring fisheries in 2011, closure of most other in-river fisheries along the Atlantic Coast by 2012, and caps on River Herring bycatch in coastal Atlantic Herring and Atlantic Mackerel fisheries. Herring spawning declined in streams as watersheds developed and conductivity increased. Conductivity was positively related with C/ha in our analysis, and with urbanization in other studies. Estimates of Pherr were more strongly related to C/ha than conductivity. Estimates of Pherr were consistently high in the three watersheds dominated by agriculture. Importance of forest cover could not be assessed with confidence since it was possible that forest cover estimates included residential tree cover. Conductivity was positively related with C/ha in our analysis and with urbanization in other studies. Estimates of Pherr were consistently high in the three watersheds dominated by agriculture, while importance of forest cover could not be assessed with confidence since it was possible that forest cover estimates included residential tree cover. General development targets and limits for C/ha or IS worked reasonably well in 8 characterizing habitat conditions for stream spawning of Herring. Low estimates of Pherr (≤ 0.4) were much more frequent beyond the C/ha threshold or when standardized conductivity was 1.5- times or more than the baseline level. Estimates of Pherr were consistently above 0.6 when development was less than the C/ha target. Section 2, Yellow Perch Larval Presence-Absence Sampling - Annual Lp, the proportion of tows with Yellow Perch larvae during a standard time period and where larvae would be expected, provides a cost-effective measure of the product of egg production and survival through the early postlarval stage. General patterns of large scale land use and Lp emerged from the expanded analyses conducted for this report: Lp was negatively related to development and positively associated with forest and agriculture. Development was an important influence on Yellow Perch egg and larval dynamics and negative changes generally conformed to development reference points. Higher DO and pH measurements in urbanized large subestuaries sampled since 2015 (Patuxent and Wicomico rivers) during Lp surveys indicated their water quality dynamics were different from the rural, agricultural Choptank River watershed. Years of high spring discharge favor anadromous fish recruitment in Chesapeake Bay and may represent episodes of hydrologic transport of accumulated organic matter from riparian marshes and forests of watersheds that fuel zooplankton production and feeding success. Amount of organic matter present in Lp samples was negatively influenced by development in Chesapeake Bay subestuaries. Wetlands appeared to be an important source of organic matter in the subestuaries we studied. At least five habitat related factors can be identified that potentially contribute to variations in Lp: salinity, summer hypoxia, maternal influence, winter temperature, and watershed development. These factors may not be independent and there is considerable potential for interactions among them. Section 3: Estuarine Community Sampling in Summer:Dissolved Oxygen Dynamics - Correlation analyses of DO with temperature and C/ha in subestuaries sampled since 2003 indicated that DO responded differently depending on salinity classification. Mean bottom DO in summer surveys declined with development in mesohaline subestuaries, reaching average levels below 3.0 mg/L when development was beyond its threshold, but it did not decline
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2012-AG-Environmental-Audit.Pdf
    TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER ONE: YOUGHIOGHENY RIVER AND DEEP CREEK LAKE .................. 4 I. Background .......................................................................................................... 4 II. Active Enforcement and Pending Matters ........................................................... 9 III. The Youghiogheny River/Deep Creek Lake Audit, May 16, 2012: What the Attorney General Learned............................................................................................. 12 CHAPTER TWO: COASTAL BAYS ............................................................................. 15 I. Background ........................................................................................................ 15 II. Active Enforcement Efforts and Pending Matters ............................................. 17 III. The Coastal Bays Audit, July 12, 2012: What the Attorney General Learned .. 20 CHAPTER THREE: WYE RIVER ................................................................................. 24 I. Background ........................................................................................................ 24 II. Active Enforcement and Pending Matters ......................................................... 26 III. The Wye River Audit, October 10, 2012: What the Attorney General Learned 27 CHAPTER FOUR: POTOMAC RIVER NORTH BRANCH AND SAVAGE RIVER 31 I. Background .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Report Card 2017 Midshore Rivers
    Report Card 2017 Midshore Rivers 114 South Washington Street Suite 301 Easton, MD 21601 shorerivers.org EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ShoreRivers is pleased to release this eighth annual River Report Card regarding the Choptank, Miles and Wye Rivers, Eastern Bay, and their tributaries. This is produced from data collected by our scientists, Riverkeepers, and approximately 50 volunteer Midshore Creekwatchers who together sampled at over 100 sites from May to October 2017. I am pleased to report that the results are in line with those from the past two years, reflecting improved water clarity, expanding grass beds, and reduced or stable pollution concentrations for many sampling locations. The year 2017 had wet and dry months and the data correlated to these weather trends. Months with increased rainfall washed from the land pollutants such as sediments and fertilizers into our rivers, an important indicator that river pollution comes from the surrounding land. As in years past, our organization has been heavily involved in installing pollution- reducing practices across our watersheds that are contributing to improved river health. As many of you know, Midshore Riverkeeper Conservancy merged January 1, 2018 with the Chester River Association and the Sassafras River Association to become ShoreRivers, employing four Riverkeepers and a staff of twenty river advocates. We are in the process of developing a uniform program including a quality assurance project plan (QAPP) that will meet the standards set forth by the state and federal government for Tier III status so that our data will be acceptable to state and federal agencies for consideration in policy decision-making.
    [Show full text]
  • 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
    [Show full text]
  • Report of Investigations 71 (Pdf, 4.8
    Department of Natural Resources Resource Assessment Service MARYLAND GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Emery T. Cleaves, Director REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS NO. 71 A STRATEGY FOR A STREAM-GAGING NETWORK IN MARYLAND by Emery T. Cleaves, State Geologist and Director, Maryland Geological Survey and Edward J. Doheny, Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey Prepared for the Maryland Water Monitoring Council in cooperation with the Stream-Gage Committee 2000 Parris N. Glendening Governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend Lieutenant Governor Sarah Taylor-Rogers Secretary Stanley K. Arthur Deputy Secretary MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 580 Taylor Avenue Annapolis, Maryland 21401 General DNR Public Information Number: 1-877-620-8DNR http://www.dnr.state.md.us MARYLAND GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 2300 St. Paul Street Baltimore, Maryland 21218 (410) 554-5500 http://mgs.dnr.md.gov The facilities and services of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources are available to all without regard to race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, or physical or mental disability. COMMISSION OF THE MARYLAND GEOLOGICAL SURVEY M. GORDON WOLMAN, CHAIRMAN F. PIERCE LINAWEAVER ROBERT W. RIDKY JAMES B. STRIBLING CONTENTS Page Executive summary.........................................................................................................................................................1 Why stream gages?.........................................................................................................................................................4 Introduction............................................................................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended Maximum Fish Meals Each Year For
    Recommended Maximum Meals Each Year for Maryland Waters Recommendation based on 8 oz (0.227 kg) meal size, or the edible portion of 9 crabs (4 crabs for children) Meal Size: 8 oz - General Population; 6 oz - Women; 3 oz - Children NOTE: Consumption recommendations based on spacing of meals to avoid elevated exposure levels Recommended Meals/Year Species Waterbody General PopulationWomen* Children** Contaminants 8 oz meal 6 oz meal 3 oz meal Anacostia River 15 11 8 PCBs - risk driver Back River AVOID AVOID AVOID Pesticides*** Bush River 47 35 27 PCBs - risk driver Middle River 13 9 7 Northeast River 27 21 16 Patapsco River/Baltimore Harbor AVOID AVOID AVOID American Eel Patuxent River 26 20 15 Potomac River (DC Line to MD 301 1511 9 Bridge) South River 37 28 22 Centennial Lake No Advisory No Advisory No Advisory Methylmercury - risk driver Lake Roland 12 12 12 Pesticides*** - risk driver Liberty Reservoir 96 48 48 Methylmercury - risk driver Tuckahoe Lake No Advisory 93 56 Black Crappie Upper Potomac: DC Line to Dam #3 64 49 38 PCBs - risk driver Upper Potomac: Dam #4 to Dam #5 77 58 45 PCBs & Methylmercury - risk driver Crab meat Patapsco River/Baltimore Harbor 96 96 24 PCBs - risk driver Crab "mustard" Middle River DO NOT CONSUME Blue Crab Mid Bay: Middle to Patapsco River (1 meal equals 9 crabs) Patapsco River/Baltimore Harbor "MUSTARD" (for children: 4 crabs ) Other Areas of the Bay Eat Sparingly Anacostia 51 39 30 PCBs - risk driver Back River 33 25 20 Pesticides*** Middle River 37 28 22 Northeast River 29 22 17 Brown Bullhead Patapsco River/Baltimore Harbor 17 13 10 South River No Advisory No Advisory 88 * Women = of childbearing age (women who are pregnant or may become pregnant, or are nursing) ** Children = all young children up to age 6 *** Pesticides = banned organochlorine pesticide compounds (include chlordane, DDT, dieldrin, or heptachlor epoxide) As a general rule, make sure to wash your hands after handling fish.
    [Show full text]
  • 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
    [Show full text]
  • Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail Connecting
    CAPTAIN JOHN SMITH CHESAPEAKE NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL CONNECTING TRAILS EVALUATION STUDY 410 Severn Avenue, Suite 405 Annapolis, MD 21403 CONTENTS Acknowledgments 2 Executive Summary 3 Statement of Study Findings 5 Introduction 9 Research Team Reports 10 Anacostia River 11 Chester River 15 Choptank River 19 Susquehanna River 23 Upper James River 27 Upper Nanticoke River 30 Appendix: Research Teams’ Executive Summaries and Bibliographies 34 Anacostia River 34 Chester River 37 Choptank River 40 Susquehanna River 44 Upper James River 54 Upper Nanticoke River 56 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We are truly thankful to the research and project team, led by John S. Salmon, for the months of dedicated research, mapping, and analysis that led to the production of this important study. In all, more than 35 pro- fessionals, including professors and students representing six universities, American Indian representatives, consultants, public agency representatives, and community leaders contributed to this report. Each person brought an extraordinary depth of knowledge, keen insight and a personal devotion to the project. We are especially grateful for the generous financial support that we received from the following private foundations, organizations and corporate partners: The Morris & Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation, The Clay- ton Fund, Inc., Colcom Foundation, The Conservation Fund, Lockheed Martin, the Richard King Mellon Foundation, The Merrill Foundation, the Pennsylvania Environmental Council, the Rauch Foundation, The Peter Jay Sharp Foundation, Verizon, Virginia Environmental Endowment and the Wallace Genetic Foundation. Without their support this project would simply not have been possible. Finally, we would like to extend a special thank you to the board of directors of the Chesapeake Conser- vancy, and to John Maounis, Superintendent of the National Park Service Chesapeake Bay Office, for their leadership and unwavering commitment to the Captain John Smith Chesapeake Trail.
    [Show full text]
  • Description of the Choptane Quadrangle
    DESCRIPTION OF THE CHOPTANE QUADRANGLE. By Benjamin Leroy Miller. INTRODUCTION. ment of water power, are located such important towns and dip. The oldest strata dip 50 to 60 feet to the mile in some cities as Trenton, Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore, Wash­ places, but the succeeding beds are progressively less steeply LOCATION AND AREA. ington, Fredericksburg, Richmond, Petersburg, Raleigh, Cam- inclined and in the youngest deposits a dip of more than a few The Choptank quadrangle lies between parallels 38° 30' and den, Columbia, Augusta, Macon, and Columbus. A line drawn feet to the mile is uncommon. 39° north latitude and meridians 76° and 76° 30' west through these places would approximately separate the Coastal longitude. It includes one-fourth of a square degree of the Plain from the Piedmont Plateau. TOPOGRAPHY. earth's surface and contains 931.51 square miles. From north The Coastal Plain is divided by the present shore line into RELIEF. to south it measures 34.5 miles and from east to west its mean two parts a submerged portion, known as the continental INTRODUCTION. width is 27 miles, as it is 27.1 miles wide along the southern shelf or continental platform, and a,n emerged portion, com­ and 26.9 miles along the northern border. monly called the Coastal Plain. In some places the line sepa­ The altitude of the land in the Choptank quadrangle ranges rating the two parts is marked by a sea cliff of moderate from sea level to 120 feet above. The highest point lies about 77 height, but commonly they grade into each other with scarcely 2 miles south of Annapolis on the western margin of the quad­ perceptible change and the only mark of separation is the shore rangle.
    [Show full text]
  • Phase I, II and III Investigations of Wye Hall (18QU977), Queen Anne’S County, Maryland, for the Maryland Department of Natural Resources
    Phase I, II and III Investigations of Wye Hall (18QU977), Queen Anne’s County, Maryland, for the Maryland Department of Natural Resources. By Jennifer J. Babiarz, Amelia Chisholm, and Mark P. Leone Department of Anthropology University of Maryland College Park, Maryland 20742 Principal Investigators Mark P. Leone and Jennifer J. Babiarz Department of Anthropology University of Maryland College Park, Maryland 20742 Report Prepared for The Maryland Department of Natural Resources 580 Taylor Avenue Tawes State Office Building Annapolis, MD 21401 Archaeology in Annapolis A Cooperative Project between The University of Maryland at College Park, The Banneker-Douglass Museum, and The City of Annapolis 2008 Abstract This report describes a three years of investigations to further define the archaeological resources of the privately owned Wye Hall plantation (18QU977), late 18th century home of William Paca, Maryland governor and signer of the Declaration of Independence. Wye Hall is located on Wye Island on the Eastern Shore of Maryland in Queen Anne‟s County. Past archaeological work at Wye Hall, from 2000 through 2002, revealed extensive information about the design and usage of the original mansion and gardens from William Paca‟s time. The fieldwork documented in this report was centered on investigation of the area to the east of the main mansion, which is believed to be an area of enslaved habitation during the late 18th and early 19th centuries. This represents the first recognized Phase III investigation of a slave quarter in Queen Anne‟s County. Therefore, the results are very important for augmenting Maryland‟s Eastern Shore narratives of the past, particularly in relation to the voice and space given to African and African American histories.
    [Show full text]
  • Cruising Itineraries from Solomons Island, MD
    June 2007 Cruising Itineraries from Solomons Island, MD Just inside the mouth of the Patuxent River, Solomons Island, Maryland is not only one of the top cruising destinations on the Chesapeake Bay, but truly the gateway to cruising the Middle Bay. Whether you’re looking for a daysail or full week’s cruising, we recommend several itineraries to consider in your planning. Most are very “do-able” in a mid-size cruising sailboat with 4-6’ draft. Naturally, your boat, crew skills/interests and the weather all play significant roles in your cruise planning, so flexibility is key. Plan ahead, use up-to- date charts and weather information, and call ahead for local conditions and marina reservations where possible. Items of Note: Solomons location: N 38º 19.58’ W 076º 27.62’ Reference Charts: Solomons, Patuxent River: Chart 12264 Southern Potomac River: Chart 12285 Crisfield, Smith, Tangier: Chart 12228 Reedville, Rappahannock: Chart 12235 Herring Bay, Knapps Narrows: Chart 12266 Choptank: Chart 12263 South River, Eastern Bay: Chart 12270 Annapolis: Chart 12282 Weather links: http://www.sailsi.com/weather.htm Note: Distances: listed in nautical miles, and are approximate on navigable path Chartlets: used for illustration purposes, and not to be used for navigation 1 June 2007 Daysails* from Solomons Island, MD 1 Lighthouse Tour: Drum Point, Cove Point, Hooper Island Lighthouses, return (28 nm) 2 To Hooper Island Lighthouse, return (22 nm) 3 To Point No Point Lighthouse, return (32 nm) 4 To Cove Point Lighthouse, return (15 nm) 5 Up Patuxent River to Broomes Island, return (19 nm) 6 Up Patuxent River to Vera’s, St Leonard Creek, return (18 nm) 7 Race: Whatever boat is nearby! Broomes Vera’s Island Cove Point Lighthouse Hooper Island Lighthouse Point No Point Lighthouse * All distances approximate, round trip from Solomons 2 Chart used for illustration purposes; not to be used for navigation.
    [Show full text]
  • River Wye Catch Reports
    River Wye Catch Reports andWearying algoid and Amery unrehearsed never desquamates Trent still aggrandize his succursales! his maw peccantly. Tip-tilted Chaunce sometimes letted his eolith icily and citify so extraneously! Bauxitic Hatches have been stopped fishing wye river catch reports catching fish I sand all styles of angling then mainly for coarse fish in may local river restore salmon. As passenger commercial crabber Slaughter also needs to file a catch you every. Specimen Catch Reports Page 2 of 3 Gardner Tackle. Reports the american harp fishery river wye hoarwithy. The Wye and Usk Foundation fund that conditions have been favourable for pike fishing property the River Wye with dry weather and chill water. The Creel is give as consistently as belief with reports of 13 barbel one day on a few doubles to 11-7 reported up being mid October. Game of Catch Reports Fishing in Wales. Captree State Park 3500 E The Texas Insider Fishing Report TV show offers. Happy incoming Year playing tight lines to all Wye salmon anglers. Congratulations to Ed Matysiak for use great equation of chub and barbel 124lb from high River Wye at Hereford best barbel 10lb Closer to home. Coarse Fishing River Reports Prince Albert Angling Society. Page 20 Chehalis River in waters of the Chehalis River from mouth upstream to the internal bridge on Weyerhaeuser 1000 line. Coarse Fishing River Reports The Middle Severn Document pdf The River Teme Document pdf The River Wye Upper tube Lower Huntsham the Forge. Barbel record uk Copymax Inc. Sharing a lot of mr reuben woodford, river wye catch reports etc and.
    [Show full text]
  • New Insights: Case Study Locations Executive Summary Expanding Population, Increased Fertilizer Use, and More 5 Livestock May Counteract Water Quality Improvements
    A tool for watershed management Adjusting our course New Insights summarizes the changes in water quality resulting from The examination of water quality monitoring data associated with best New nutrient reducing practices in more than 40 Chesapeake Bay watershed case management practice implementation in the Chesapeake Bay watershed studies. In many examples, water quality monitoring data reveal the benefits reveals multiple implications for continued efforts in Bay restoration: of restoration practices aimed at reducing nutrient and sediment pollution Investments in sewage treatment plants provide rapid water flowing into our local waters. Insights: quality improvements. 1 The science-based evidence summarized here shows that: National requirements of the Clean Air Act are benefitting the Science-based evidence of • Several groups of pollution-reducing practices, also known as best management 2 Chesapeake Bay watershed. practices or BMPS, are effective at improving water quality and habitats; water quality improvements, Some agricultural practices are providing local benefits • Specific challenges can still impede water quality improvements; and challenges, and opportunities 3 to streams. • More practices that focus on the impacts of intensified agriculture and urban and in the Chesapeake suburban development are needed for healthier waters. Lag times that delay improvements mean patience and persistence 4 are needed to realize the results of our efforts. New Insights: Case study locations Executive Summary Expanding population, increased fertilizer use, and more 5 livestock may counteract water quality improvements. NEW YORK Science should be better used to guide restoration choices and 6 subsequent monitoring is needed to evaluate effectiveness. Proven and innovative stormwater management practices need Sinnemahoning Creek to be implemented and evaluated to maintain and improve Bay 7 health as urban and suburban development expands.
    [Show full text]