DOCSLIB.ORG

Distribution of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation in the Chesapeake Bay and Tributaries and Chincoteague Bay - 1991

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

W&M ScholarWorks Reports 12-1992 Distribution of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation In The Chesapeake Bay and Tributaries and Chincoteague Bay - 1991 R J. Orth Judith F. Nowak Virginia Institute of Marine Science Gary Anderson Virginia Institute of Marine Science Kevin P. Kiley Virginia Institute of Marine Science Jennifer R. Whiting Virginia Institute of Marine Science Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/reports Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Orth, R. J., Nowak, J. F., Anderson, G., Kiley, K. P., & Whiting, J. R. (1992) Distribution of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation In The Chesapeake Bay and Tributaries and Chincoteague Bay - 1991. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary. http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/m2-031r-g688 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Reports by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 11° oo' 76° 00' 75°00' 39° oo' 38° oo' 37° 0 10 20 30 oo' NAUTICAL MILES 11° oo' 75° oo· \/\rfl:S ~~ JJ~.i OG+ \~q I C,.3 Distribution of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation in the Chesapeake Bay and Tributaries and Chincoteague Bay - 1991 by Robert J. Orth, Judith F. Nowak, Gary F. Anderson, Kevin P. Kiley, and Jennifer R. Whiting Virginia Institute of Marine Science School of Marine Science College of William and Mary Gloucester Point, VA 23062 Funded by: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Grant X00346503) National Oceanographic Atmospheric Administration (Grant No. NAl 70Z0359-0l) Virginia Institute of Marine Science/School of Marine Science Maryland Department of Natural Resources (C272-92-005) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (14-16-0005-91-9023) Allied-Signal Foundation Final Report Submitted to: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program Offic:e Annapolis, MD 21403 December 1992 Cover Photograph: Hydrilla verticillata in the Potomac River. (Photograph by Nancy Rybicki, USGS.) Inside Cover: Map of Chesapeake Bay and Tributaries and Chincoteague Bay. CONTENTS Page TABLES . iv FIGURES V EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS xiii SAV SPECIES . 1 METHODS ... 2 Introduction . 2 Aerial photography . 2 Mapping process . 5 SAV perimeter digitization and area calculation 9 Tests of precision and accuracy . 9 Standard operating procedures . 11 Choice of representative SAV bed . 11 Conversion of SAV perimeter points from X,Y centimeters to Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates in ARC/INFO format . 12 Calculation of 1991 SAV areas . 12 Organizational procedures for analysis . 13 Ground truth and other data bases . 17 RESULTS ...... 20 Data presentation 20 1991 Summary . 20 Upper Bay Zone . 20 Middle Bay Zone . 37 Lower Bay Zone . 37 Chincoteague Bay 38 Discussion of sections arranged within zones . 38 Upper Bay Zone . 38 Susquehanna Flats (Section 1) . 38 Upper Eastern Shore (Section 2) . 38 Upper Western Shore (Section 3) . 41 Chester River (Section 4) 41 Middle Bay Zone . 41 ii CONTENTS (continued) Page RESULTS (continued) Central Western Shore (Section 5) 41 Eastern Bay (Section 6) . 45 Choptank River (Section 7) . 45 Patuxent River (Section 8) . • • 45 Middle Western Shore (Section 9) 45 Lower Potomac River (Section 10) 50 Upper Potomac River (Section 11) 50 Middle Eastern Shore (Section 12) 53 Mid-Bay Island Complex (Section 13) 53 Lower Bay Zone . 53 Lower Eastern Shore (Section 14) . 53 Reedville Region (Section 15) . 57 Rappahannock River Complex (Section 16) 57 New Point Comfort Region (Section 17) 60 Mobjack Bay Complex (Section 18) . 60 York River (Section 19) ...... 60 Lower Western Shore (Section 20) 60 James River (Section 21) 65 Chincoteague Bay 65 LITERATURE CITED 68 APPENDICES . 71 A Species of submerged aquatic plants found in the Chesapeake Bay and tributaries . 73 B. Latitude and longitude coordinate points defining the 21 Chesapeake Bay sections and Chincoteague Bay 85 C. Topographic quadrangles for the Chesapeake Bay and Chincoteague Bay showing distribution, abundance, and ground trothing of SAV in 1991 . 89 Map Legend ...................... 90 D. Number of square meters of SAV for individual beds and totals for density categories for each topographic quadrangle in 1991 . 205 E. 1991 SAV ground truth data listed by topographic quadrangle and by SAV bed, cross referenced with 1990 SAV beds . 233 iii TABLES Number Page 1 Guidelines for acquisition of aerial photographs . 4 2 List of USGS 7 .5 minute topographic quadrangles for the Chesapeake Bay and Chincoteague Bay SAV study areas and corresponding code numbers . 7 3 Area descriptions for each of the 21 sections in the Chesapeake Bay SAV study area . 15 4 Total area of SAVin hectares by USGS 7 .5 minute topographic quadrangle for 1990 and 1991 . 21 5 Number ofhectares ofSAVin 1990 and 1991 for the 21 sections and three zones of the Chesapeake Bay, and for Chincoteague Bay . 26 6 Number of square meters of SAV in 1991 for each quadrangle of the 21 sections in the Chesapeake Bay and of Chincoteague Bay 27 iv FIGURES Number Page 1 Map of Chesapeake Bay and tributaries with Upper, Middle, and Lower zones, and Chincoteague Bay, with locations of all SAV beds in 1991 ix 2 Total hectares SAV for the Upper, Middle, and Lower zones of the Chesapeake Bay in 1991 . • . x 3 Total hectares SAV in 1991 by section of the Chesapeake Bay . xi 4 Map of Chesapeake Bay, its tributaries, and Chincoteague Bay with approximate locations of flight lines for 1991 SAV photo- graphy.............................. 3 5 Location ofUSGS 7.5 minute topographic quadrangles in the Chesapeake Bay, its tributaries, and Chincoteague Bay with corresponding code numbers . 6 6 Crown density scale used for determining density of SAV beds: (1) very sparse, 0-10%; (2) sparse, 10-40%; (3) moderate, 40-70%; (4) dense, 70-100% ................... 10 7 Location of Chincoteague Bay and Chesapeake Bay with Upper, Middle, and Lower zones and 21 sections used for delineation of SAV distribution patterns . , . 14 8 Distribution of SAV in the Susquehanna Flats (Section 1) 39 9 Distribution of SAV in the Upper Eastern Shore (Section 2) 40 10 Distribution of SAVin the Upper Western Shore (Section 3) 42 11 Distribution of SAV in the Chester River (Section 4) . 43 12 Distribution of SAV in the Central Western Shore (Section 5) . 44 13 Distribution of SAV in the Eastern Bay (Section 6) . 46 14 Distribution of SAV in the Choptank River (Section7) . 47 15 Distribution of SAV in the Patuxent River (Section 8) . 48 V FIGURES (continued) Number Page 16 Distribution of SAVin the Middle Western Shore (Section 9) . 49 17 Distribution of SAVin the Lower Potomac River (Section 10) 51 18 Distribution of SAVin the Upper Potomac River (Section 11) 52 19 Distribution of SAV in the Middle Eastern Shore (Section 12) 54 20 Distribution of SAVin the Mid-Bay Island Complex (Section 13) . 55 21 Distribution of SAV in the Lower Eastern Shore (Section 14) . 56 22 Distribution of SAV in the Reedville Region (Section 15) . 58 23 Distribution of SAV in the Rappahannock River Complex (Section 16) . 59 24 Distribution of SAV in the New Point Comfort Region (Section 17) 61 25 Distribution of SAV in the Mobjack Bay Complex (Section 18) 62 26 Distribution of SAV in the York River (Section 19) . 63 27 Distribution of SAV in the Lower Western Shore (Section 20) 64 28 Distribution ofSAVin the James River (Section 21) . 66 29 Distribution of SAV in the Chincoteague Bay . 67 30 Illustration of Chara spp. (Muskgrass) . 74 31 Illustration of Nitella spp. (Stonewort) . 75 32 Illustration of Najas guadalupensis (Southern naiad) . 76 33 Illustration of Vallisneria americana (Tapegrass) . 77 34 Illustration of Egeria spp. (Water-weed) . 78 35 Illustration of Hydrilla verticillata (Hydrilla) . 79 vi FIGURES (continued) Number Page 36 A comparison: illustrations of Hydrilla verticillata, Elodea canadensis, and Egeria spp. 80 37 A comparison: illustrations of Hydrilla verticillata, Elodea canadensis, and Egeria spp. 81 38 Illustration of Ceratophyllum demersum (Coontail) 82 39 Illustration of Trapa natans (Water chestnut) . 83 40 Illustration of Myriophyllum spicatum (Eurasian watermilfoil) 84 vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The distribution of submerged aquatic vegetation, principally rooted vascular macrophytes, in the Chesapeake Bay, its tributaries, and Chincoteague Bay was mapped during May to October 1991 at a scale of 1:24,000 using black and white aerial photography. SAV bed perimeter information was digitized and stored in a computerized data base. Ground truth information was obtained from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the University of Maryland Horn Point Environmental Laboratories, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Harford Community College, Essex Community College SAV Research Group of Baltimore County, National Park Service, Assateague Island, and the College of William and MaryNirginia Institute of Marine Science/School of Marine Science. Citizen support via the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Chesapeake Bay Foundation provided additional ground truth information. In 1991, the Chesapeake Bay had 25,623 hectares of SAV, compared to 24,296 hectares in 1990, with 2,158 hectares (8.4%), 11,664 hectares (45.5%), and 11,802 hectares (46.1%) occurring in the Upper, Middle, and Lower Bay zones, respectively (Figs. 1, 2, and 3). In 1991 seventy-eight percent (1,684 hectares) of the SAV within the Upper Bay zone was located in the Susquehanna Flats (Section 1). Eight species of SAV were documented by ground truth surveys in this section, with Myriophyllum spicatum being dominant. A recently introduced exotic species, Hydrilla verticillata, was found in the Flats but occurred in small isolated beds. Overall abundance of SAV declined from the 1990 (1,773 hectares) level, but the density of beds increased slightly from 1990. Eighty-nine percent of all SAV beds in the Flats were classified as very sparse (0-10% coverage), and 7% of beds were classified as dense (70-100% coverage).
Recommended publications
  • No-Discharge Zones for Vessel Sewage in Maryland and Virginia

    No-Discharge Zones for Vessel Sewage in Maryland and Virginia

    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 05/11/2021 and available online at federalregister.gov/d/2021-09957, and on govinfo.gov 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL 10021-74-Region 3] Clean Water Act: No-Discharge Zones for Vessel Sewage in Maryland and Virginia AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice–final determination. SUMMARY: On behalf of the State of Maryland, the Secretary of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources requested that the Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 3 approve a no-discharge zone for thirteen water bodies in Anne Arundel County, Maryland pursuant to the Clean Water Act. After review of Maryland’s application, EPA determined that adequate facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are reasonable available for all thirteen waterbodies within Anne Arundel County. The application is available upon request from EPA (at the email address below). DATES: This approval is effective upon the date of publication in the Federal Register on [INSTERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ferry Akbar Buchanan, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency – Region III. Telephone: (215) 814-2570; email address: [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to Clean Water Act section 312(f)(3), if any state determines that the protection and enhancement of the quality of some or all of the state’s waters require greater environmental protection, the state may designate the waters as a vessel sewage no-discharge zone. However, the state may not establish the no-discharge zone until EPA has determined that adequate pumpout facilities for the safe and sanitary removal and treatment of sewage from all vessels are reasonably available for the proposed waters.
  • Ecological Condition of US Mid-Atlantic Estuaries, 1997–1998

    Ecological Condition of US Mid-Atlantic Estuaries, 1997–1998

    Marine Pollution Bulletin 46 (2003) 1224–1244 www.elsevier.com/locate/marpolbul Review Ecological condition of US Mid-Atlantic estuaries, 1997–1998 John A.Kiddon a,*, John F.Paul b, Harry W.Buffum c, Charles S.Strobel a, Stephen S.Hale a, Donald Cobb a, Barbara S.Brown a a US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Atlantic Ecology Division, 27 Tarzwell Drive, Narragansett, RI 02882, USA b US Environmental Protection Agency, ORD, NHEERL, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA c Computer Sciences Corporation, 27 Tarzwell Drive, Narragansett, RI 02882, USA Abstract The Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment (MAIA-Estuaries) evaluated ecological conditions in US Mid-Atlantic estuaries during the summers of 1997 and 1998.Over 800 probability-based stations were monitored in four main estuarine systems––Chesapeake Bay, the Delaware Estuary, Maryland and Virginian coastal bays, and the Albemarle–Pamlico Estuarine System.Twelve smaller estuaries within the four main systems were also assessed to establish variance at the local scale.A subset of the MAIA-Estuaries data is used here to estimate the extent of eutrophication, sediment contamination, and benthic degradation in mid-Atlantic estuaries.An Envi- ronmental Report Card and Index of Environmental Integrity summarize conditions in individual estuaries, the four estuarine systems, and the entire MAIA region.Roughly 20–50% of the region showed signs of eutrophication (high nutrients, excessive production of organic matter, poor water clarity, or depleted dissolved oxygen), 30% had contaminated sediments, and 37% had degraded benthic communities.Compared with the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP)-Virginian Province study in 1990– 1993, larger fractions of Chesapeake Bay (17%) and Delaware River (32%) had increased metals or organics in sediments.
  • NON-TIDAL BENTHIC MONITORING DATABASE: Version 3.5

    NON-TIDAL BENTHIC MONITORING DATABASE: Version 3.5

    NON-TIDAL BENTHIC MONITORING DATABASE: Version 3.5 DATABASE DESIGN DOCUMENTATION AND DATA DICTIONARY 1 June 2013 Prepared for: United States Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program 410 Severn Avenue Annapolis, Maryland 21403 Prepared By: Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin 51 Monroe Street, PE-08 Rockville, Maryland 20850 Prepared for United States Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program 410 Severn Avenue Annapolis, MD 21403 By Jacqueline Johnson Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin To receive additional copies of the report please call or write: The Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin 51 Monroe Street, PE-08 Rockville, Maryland 20850 301-984-1908 Funds to support the document The Non-Tidal Benthic Monitoring Database: Version 3.0; Database Design Documentation And Data Dictionary was supported by the US Environmental Protection Agency Grant CB- CBxxxxxxxxxx-x Disclaimer The opinion expressed are those of the authors and should not be construed as representing the U.S. Government, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the several states or the signatories or Commissioners to the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin: Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia or the District of Columbia. ii The Non-Tidal Benthic Monitoring Database: Version 3.5 TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................. 3 INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................
  • Nautical Information for Skippers and Crews

    Nautical Information for Skippers and Crews

    Sail Plan Pentagon Sailing Club 2016 Memorial Day Raft­up: “STORM FRONT COMING” 28­30 May 2016 Nautical Information for Skippers and Crews FLOAT PLAN ******************************************************************************************** References: NOAA Charts ­12270 Chesapeake Bay – Chesapeake Eastern Bay and South River; 1:40,000 ­12266 Chesapeake Bay – Chesapeake – Choptank and Herring Bay; 1:40,000 ­12280 Chesapeake Bay – 1:200,000 Pentagon Sailing Club Raft­Up Guidelines (revised 06/2005; link online at the PSC site under “Raft­Up”) Saturday, 28 May 16. Sail from Annapolis, MD the Chesapeake Bay to Trippe Creek, vicinity of Choptank River. Raft up Saturday night (see Navigation below). Distance from Annapolis (direct route past Thomas Point to Choptank River, Tred Avon River, then Trippe Creek and raft up location) is approximately 33 nm Sunday, 29 May 16. Exit Trippe Creek, Tred Avon River, then Choptank River to Campbell’s Boatyard LLC, Bachelor’s Point Marina (Oxford, MD). Dinner will be held at “The Masthead at Pier Street Marina” restaurant in Oxford, MD; cocktails from 5pm, and dinner from 6 to 8pm. Monday, 30 May 16. Sail back to respective points of origin NAVIGATION ******************************************************************************************** Saturday, 28 May: Sail from Annapolis, MD to Raft up destination is in the Trippe Creek vic 038º 42.8 North; 076º 07.3 West. See Chart A and B. From Annapolis R “2” Fl R 2.5s (Lat 038º 56.4 N; Lon 076º 25.3 W) ­Sail from R “2” Fl R 2.5s 185º M to WP A (Lat 038º
  • Accomack County, Virginia Shoreline Inventory Report Methods and Guidelines

    Accomack County, Virginia Shoreline Inventory Report Methods and Guidelines

    W&M ScholarWorks Reports 9-2016 Accomack County, Virginia Shoreline Inventory Report Methods and Guidelines Marcia Berman Virginia Institute of Marine Science Karinna Nunez Virginia Institute of Marine Science Sharon Killeen Virginia Institute of Marine Science Tamia Rudnicky Virginia Institute of Marine Science Julie Bradshaw Virginia Institute of Marine Science See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/reports Part of the Natural Resources and Conservation Commons Recommended Citation Berman, M., Nunez, K., Killeen, S., Rudnicky, T., Bradshaw, J., Angstadt, K., Tombleson, C., Duhring, K., Brown, K., Hendricks, J., Weiss, D., Hershner, C., & Comprehensive Coastal Inventory Program. (2016) Accomack County, Virginia Shoreline Inventory Report Methods and Guidelines. Special Report in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering (SRAMSOE) No. 450. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, William & Mary. http://doi.org/10.21220/V58C79 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Reports by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors Marcia Berman, Karinna Nunez, Sharon Killeen, Tamia Rudnicky, Julie Bradshaw, Kory Angstadt, Christine Tombleson, Karen Duhring, Kallie Brown, Jessica Hendricks, David Weiss, Carl Hershner, and Comprehensive Coastal Inventory Program This report is available at W&M ScholarWorks: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/reports/61 Accomack County, Virginia Shoreline Inventory Report Methods and Guidelines Prepared By: Comprehensive Coastal Inventory Program Center for Coastal Resources Management Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary Gloucester Point, Virginia September 2016 Special report in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering No.
  • Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Protection Zones

    Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Protection Zones

    PUBLIC NOTICE The Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fishing and Boating Services Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Protection Zones WHAT THIS NOTICE DOES The Secretary of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources announces delineations of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) protection zones. The zones are delineated in the Code of Maryland Regulation (COMAR) 08.02.01.12. The most recent update became effective February 8, 2021. This notice supersedes any notices about delineations of SAV protection zones issued prior to February 8, 2021. PROHIBITED GEAR IN SAV PROTECTION ZONES The use of a hydraulic clam dredge, traditional bottom dredge, or shinnecock rake in an SAV protection zone is prohibited. WHY THIS IS NECESSARY SAV protection zones are delineated for the protection from uprooting and the restoration of SAV. The zones are delineated in accordance with Natural Resources Article, §4-1006.1, Annotated Code of Maryland. AREAS The following areas are SAV protection zones: County of SAV Protection Zone Page Numbers Anne Arundel 1 Calvert 2—3 Dorchester 3—4 Kent 4—5 Queen Anne’s 5—6 Saint Mary’s 6—8 Somerset 8—18 Talbot 18—23 Worcester 23—26 Anne Arundel County All of the waters of Old Colony Cove and Herring Bay enclosed by a line beginning at a point at or near the shore of Old Colony Cove along the shore at the entrance to Herrington Harbour defined by Lat. 38°43.709' N, Long. 76°32.510' W; then running approximately 309° True to a point at or near the shore of Old Colony Cove defined by Lat.
  • 2012-AG-Environmental-Audit.Pdf

    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 .......................................................................................................
  • Shoreline Management in Chesapeake Bay C

    Shoreline Management in Chesapeake Bay C

    Shoreline Management In Chesapeake Bay C. S. Hardaway, Jr. and R. J. Byrne Virginia Institute of Marine Science College of William and Mary 1 Cover Photo: Drummond Field, Installed 1985, James River, James City County, Virginia. This publication is available for $10.00 from: Sea Grant Communications Virginia Institute of Marine Science P. O. Box 1346 Gloucester Point, VA 23062 Special Report in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering Number 356 Virginia Sea Grant Publication VSG-99-11 October 1999 Funding and support for this report were provided by... Virginia Institute of Marine Science Virginia Sea Grant College Program Sea Grant Contract # NA56RG0141 Virginia Coastal Resource Management Program NA470Z0287 WILLIAM& MARY Shoreline Management In Chesapeake Bay By C. Scott Hardaway, Jr. and Robert J. Byrne Virginia Institute of Marine Science College of William and Mary Gloucester Point, Virginia 23062 1999 4 Table of Contents Preface......................................................................................7 Shoreline Evolution ................................................................8 Shoreline Processes ..............................................................16 Wave Climate .......................................................................16 Shoreline Erosion .................................................................20 Reach Assessment ................................................................23 Shoreline Management Strategies ......................................24 Bulkheads and Seawalls
  • MDE-Water Pollution

    MDE-Water Pollution

    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT Subtitle 08 WATER POLLUTION Chapters 01-10 Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................... 1 Subtitle 08 WATER POLLUTION .................................................................................................................... 1 Chapters 01-10 ................................................................................................................................................ 1 Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................... 2 Subtitle 08 WATER POLLUTION .................................................................................................................... 2 Chapter 01 General ......................................................................................................................................... 2 .01 Definitions................................................................................................................................................. 3 .02 Principles of Water Pollution Control....................................................................................................
  • Deer and Turkey Tagging & Checking

    Deer and Turkey Tagging & Checking

    DEER AND TURKEY TAGGING & CHECKING Garrett Allegany CWDMA Washington Frederick Carroll Baltimore Harford Lineboro Maryland Line Cardiff Finzel 47 Ellerlise Pen Mar Norrisville 24 Whiteford ysers 669 40 Ringgold Harney Freeland 165 Asher Youghiogheny 40 Ke 40 ALT Piney Groev ALT 68 615 81 11 Emmitsburg 86 ge Grantsville Barrellville 220 Creek Fairview 494 Cearfoss 136 136 Glade River aLke Rid 546 Mt. avSage Flintstone 40 Cascade Sabillasville 624 Prospect 68 ALT 36 itts 231 40 Hancock 57 418 Melrose 439 Harkins Corriganville v Harvey 144 194 Eklo Pylesville 623 E Aleias Bentley Selbysport 40 36 tone Maugansville 550 419410 Silver Run 45 68 Pratt 68 Mills 60 Leitersburg Deep Run Middletown Springs 23 42 68 64 270 496 Millers Shane 646 Zilhman 40 251 Fountain Head Lantz Drybranch 543 230 ALT Exline P 58 62 Prettyboy Friendsville 638 40 o 70 St. aulsP Union Mills Bachman Street t Clear 63 491 Manchester Dublin 40 o Church mithsburg Taneytown Mills Resevoir 1 Aviltn o Eckhart Mines Cumberland Rush m Spring W ilson S Motters 310 165 210 LaVale a Indian 15 97 Rayville 83 440 Frostburg Glarysville 233 c HagerstownChewsville 30 er Springs Cavetown n R 40 70 Huyett Parkton Shawsville Federal r Cre Ady Darlingto iv 219 New Little 250 iv Cedar 76 140 Dee ek R Ridgeley Twiggtown e 68 64 311 Hill Germany 40 Orleans r Pinesburg Keysville Mt. leasP ant Rocks 161 68 Lawn 77 Greenmont 25 Blackhorse 55 White Hall Elder Accident Midlothian Potomac 51 Pumkin Big pringS Thurmont 194 23 Center 56 11 27 Weisburg Jarrettsville 136 495 936 Vale Park Washington
  • Lll'"Iii""!Lllliillllliil MARYLAND BIRDLIFE Il~Ll;I,I,,,,,Illlllllllil

    Lll'"Iii""!Lllliillllliil MARYLAND BIRDLIFE Il~Ll;I,I,,,,,Illlllllllil

    ISSN 0147-9725 lll'"iii""!lllliillllliil MARYLAND BIRDLIFE il~ll;i,i,,,,,illlllllllil, oo o L "8 N ,.j SEPTEMBER 1988 VOLUME 44 NUMBER 3 MARYLAND ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY, INC. Cylburn Mansion, 4915 Greenspring Ave., Baltimore, Maryland 21209 STATE OFFICERS FOR JUNE 1988 TO JUNE 1989 EXECUTIVE COUNCIL President: Robt. F. Ringlet, 6272 Pinyon Pine Ct., Eldersburg, MD 21784 549-6031 V. President:Richard J. Dolesh, 17800 Croom Rd., Brandywine, MD 20613 627-6074 Treasurer: Emily Joyce, 816 Oak Trail, Crownsville, MD 21032 768-0142 Secretary: Patricia J. Moore, 24600 Woodfield Rd., Damascus, MD 21403 253-2796 Exec. Secy.: Joy Aso, 1250 4th St., SW, Washington, D.C. 20024 (202) 554-8529 Past Pres.: CDR Anthony White, 5872 Marbury Rd., Bethesda, MD 20817229-1641 STATE DIRECTORS Allegany: *Teresa Simons Howard: *Thomas Strikwerda Mark Weatherholt Jane H. Farrell Ralph Geuder Anne Arundel: *Sue Ricciardi Paul Zucker Helen Ford Dorothy Mumford Jug Bay: *Jean Tierney Joan Stephens Baltimore: *William Newman John Cullom Kent: *John Lorenz Graham Egerton Margaret Duncan A. MacDonough Plant Robert F. Ringler Montgomery: *Henry Bielstein Stephen W. Simon Margaret Donnald Karen Skuldt John Malcolm Joy Wheeler Lola Oberman Caroline: *Mariana Nuttle Patuxent: *Sam Droege Oliver Smith Chandler S. Robbins Carroll: *Melinda Byrd Talbot: *Lester Coble Wayne Gordon Jeff Effinger Steve Goodbred Frederick: *Stauffer Miller Melvin Bennett Washington: *Robert Keedy Joseph Swope, Jr. Harford: *Dennis Kirkwood Todd Holden Wicomico: *Gall Vaughn William Russell Charles Vaughn *Denotes Chapter President Active Membership (adults) 6.00 plus local chapter dues Student Membership (full-time students) 2.00 plus local chapter dues Junior Membership (under 18 years) 1.00 plus local chapter dues Family Membership (Mr.
  • Maryland Historical Magazine, 1946, Volume 41, Issue No. 4

    Maryland Historical Magazine, 1946, Volume 41, Issue No. 4

    MHRYMnD CWAQAZIU^j MARYLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY BALTIMORE DECEMBER • 1946 t. IN 1900 Hutzler Brothers Co. annexed the building at 210 N. Howard Street. Most of the additional space was used for the expansion of existing de- partments, but a new shoe shop was installed on the third floor. It is interesting to note that the shoe department has now returned to its original location ... in a greatly expanded form. HUTZLER BPOTHERSe N\S/Vsc5S8M-lW MARYLAND HISTORICAL MAGAZINE A Quarterly Volume XLI DECEMBER, 1946 Number 4 BALTIMORE AND THE CRISIS OF 1861 Introduction by CHARLES MCHENRY HOWARD » HE following letters, copies of letters, and other documents are from the papers of General Isaac Ridgeway Trimble (b. 1805, d. 1888). They are confined to a brief period of great excitement in Baltimore, viz, after the riot of April 19, 1861, when Federal troops were attacked by the mob while being marched through the City streets, up to May 13th of that year, when General Butler, with a large body of troops occupied Federal Hill, after which Baltimore was substantially under control of the 1 Some months before his death in 1942 the late Charles McHenry Howard (a grandson of Charles Howard, president of the Board of Police in 1861) placed the papers here printed in the Editor's hands for examination, and offered to write an introduction if the Committee on Publications found them acceptable for the Magazine. Owing to the extraordinary events related and the revelation of an episode unknown in Baltimore history, Mr. Howard's proposal was promptly accepted.