Deer and Turkey Tagging & Checking
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. -
Native News, September/October 2006
Native News Newsletter of the Maryland Native Plant Society September/October 2006 Volume 6 Number 5 Inside This Issue: Upcoming Monthly Meetings President’s Letter Page 2 “Goldenrods, Asters, and Thoroughworts” ~ Tuesday, September 26, 7:30 pm MNPS Contacts White Oak Library – Large Meeting Room Page 2 ~ The Asteraceae (Aster Family) is a large and diverse family that is MNPS Announcements especially well-developed in North America. Maryland and the mid- Page 3 Atlantic region are home to a particularly rich diversity of native plants ~ in the Aster Family. Join botanist Rod Simmons for an in-depth Upcoming Chapter Events Page 3 presentation of the many native species of Solidago, Eupatorium, and ~ Aster (formerly) in Maryland. The talk will focus on identification of Wildflower in Focus the common species, but will also include uncommon and rare ones Page 4 and habitats throughout the state where they may be found. Live plant ~ material will be available for hands-on identification. Late Summer/Fall Field Trips Page 5 “The Importance of Hybridization in the ~ Invasive Exotic Plant Systematic Evolution of Oaks” Removal Workdays Tuesday, October 24, 7:30 pm Page 6 White Oak Library – Large Meeting Room ~ General Announcements The oaks are one of North America’s most widespread and important Page 7 trees. Nearly 80 native species of oaks occur in North America, not including the numerous natural hybrids and app. 100 species in Mexico. Maryland is one of the most diverse areas in the east for oaks, with 21 of the 41 oak species native to the eastern U.S., not including hybrids. -
Section III: County Profile
Section III: County Profile Approved General Plan | 51 SECTION III: COUNTY PROFILE 52 | PLAN Prince George’s 2035 SECTION III: COUNTY PROFILE County Profile and Analysis .....54 Assets and Challenges ............. 72 Indicates that the definition of a word or term may be found in the Glossary of Terms, which starts on page 282. Approved General Plan | 53 County Profile and Analysis COUNTY PROFILE AND ANALYSIS County Profile and Analysis Understanding who Prince George’s County is today and who it is becoming is critical to developing effective policies and strategies to meet the needs of current and future residents. Regional Context Prince George’s County consists of 498 square miles (approximately 320,000 acres). It is bounded by Howard County to the north, Anne Arundel County and Calvert County to the east, Charles County to the south, and Montgomery County, Fairfax County, Virginia, and the District of Columbia to the west (see Map 5). Prince George’s County is located within the Washington metropolitan area, which is home to 5.6 million residents and 3.9 million jobs. The region’s strong and diverse economy is fueled by federal spending that has weathered recent recessions and nurtured growing research, commerce, information, and technology sectors. Municipalities Prince George’s County has 27 incorporated municipalities which help provide a range of critical services for County residents (see Public Facilities Element). Demographic Profile Population With an estimated population of 881,130 in 2012, Prince George’s County is the third most populous jurisdiction in the Washington metropolitan area, following Fairfax County (1,118,602), Virginia and neighboring Montgomery County (1,004,709). -
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 -
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 -
Multiproxy Evidence of Holocene Climate Variability from Estuarine Sediments, Eastern North America T
PALEOCEANOGRAPHY, VOL. 20, PA4006, doi:10.1029/2005PA001145, 2005 Multiproxy evidence of Holocene climate variability from estuarine sediments, eastern North America T. M. Cronin,1 R. Thunell,2 G. S. Dwyer,3 C. Saenger,1 M. E. Mann,4,5 C. Vann,1 and R. R. Seal II1 Received 14 February 2005; revised 19 May 2005; accepted 8 July 2005; published 19 October 2005. [1] We reconstructed paleoclimate patterns from oxygen and carbon isotope records from the fossil estuarine benthic foraminifera Elphidium and Mg/Ca ratios from the ostracode Loxoconcha from sediment cores from Chesapeake Bay to examine the Holocene evolution of North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO)-type climate variability. Precipitation-driven river discharge and regional temperature variability are the primary influences 18 on Chesapeake Bay salinity and water temperature, respectively. We first calibrated modern d Owater to salinity 18 and applied this relationship to calculate trends in paleosalinity from the d Oforam, correcting for changes in water temperature estimated from ostracode Mg/Ca ratios. The results indicate a much drier early Holocene in which mean paleosalinity was 28 ppt in the northern bay, falling 25% to 20 ppt during the late Holocene. Early Holocene Mg/Ca-derived temperatures varied in a relatively narrow range of 13° to 16°C with a mean temperature of 14.2°C and excursions above 16°C; the late Holocene was on average cooler (mean temperature of 12.8°C). In addition to the large contrast between early and late Holocene regional climate conditions, multidecadal (20–40 years) salinity and temperature variability is an inherent part of the region’s climate during both the early and late Holocene, including the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age. -
News and Notes Prince George's County J § 'W
News and Notes Prince George's County J § 'W . CO , Historical Society ! = = 3 e 'MaritlU' February 1997 Our 45th Year Volume XXV Number 1 BOARD OF DIRECTORS 1997 President - Jane Eagen Directors 1997-1999 Past Presidents Vice President - Eugene Roberts, Jr. Mildred Ridgeley Gray John Giannetti Secretary - Sarah Bourne Melinda Alter Paul T. Lanham Treasurer - John Bourne Katherine Clagett Warren Rhoads Historian - Frederick DeMarr Directors 1996-1998 W.C. (Bud) Button Editor - Sharon Howe Sweeting Julie Bright Joyce MacDonald John Mitchell William Uber Illustration by Fred H. Greenberg from Washington Itself by E. J. Applewhite, 1986 JOIN US on SATURDAY, MARCH 8 at 2:00 pm at the Glenn Dale Community Center Mr David J. Danelski, Supreme Court Historian, will speak on Sons of Maryland on the United States Supreme Court: Thomas Johnson, Samuel Chase, Gabriel Duvall, Roger Brooke Taney and Thurgood Marshall. Mr. Danelski has researched, taught and written extensively about the United States Supreme Count. He will share little know stories and attempt to undo some popular misconceptions about these men. We have invited the members of the Duvall Society to join us for this celebration of Gabriel Duvall. The reception following the program will be at Marietta, home of Gabriel Duvall. FROM THE EDITOR'S DESK Happy New Year. You will notice on the cover the new/old Board of Directors of the Historical Society and an announcement of the meeting on Saturday, March 8 (2:00 pm, Glenn Dale Community Center) on "Sons of Maryland on the United States Supreme Court." This issue begins with the continuation of a column called Meet the Meet the Board Board written by Secretary Sarah Bourne. -
2010 Regular Session
Martin O'Malley, Governor Ch. 431 Chapter 431 (House Bill 1472) AN ACT concerning Hunting Wild Waterfowl – Dorchester, St. Mary’s, Somerset, and Wicomico Counties FOR the purpose of altering the location in which a person may hunt wild waterfowl by certain methods in the waters of Dorchester, St. Mary’s, Somerset, and Wicomico counties; decreasing the distance from shore that the Department of Natural Resources prescribes by regulation for the hunting of wild waterfowl by certain methods in the waters of Dorchester, St. Mary’s, Somerset, and Wicomico counties; and generally relating to hunting wild waterfowl in the waters of Dorchester, St. Mary’s, Somerset, and Wicomico counties. BY repealing and reenacting, with amendments, Article – Natural Resources Section 10–604 through 10–606 Annotated Code of Maryland (2007 Replacement Volume and 2009 Supplement) SECTION 1. BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF MARYLAND, That the Laws of Maryland read as follows: Article – Natural Resources 10–604. (a) A person may hunt wild waterfowl while standing in water on the natural bottom only in the waters of the Susquehanna Flats, the nontidal waters of the Potomac River, THE WATERS OF TANGIER SOUND, FISHING BAY, MONIE BAY, MANOKIN RIVER, BIG ANNEMESSEX RIVER, POCOMOKE SOUND, AND KEDGES STRAITS IN THE WATERS OF DORCHESTER, SOMERSET, AND WICOMICO COUNTIES, and in other waters of the State in areas and on days the Department prescribes by regulation. (b) A person may hunt wild waterfowl while standing in water on the natural bottom at a licensed offshore stationary blind or blind site. (c) A person hunting wild waterfowl while standing in water on the natural bottom shall remain at least 250 yards from all offshore stationary blinds or blind sites or another person hunting wild waterfowl offshore. -
Attorney General's 2013 Chesapeake Bay
TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 2 CHAPTER ONE: LIBERTY AND PRETTYBOY RESERVOIRS ......................................................... 5 I. Background ...................................................................................................................................... 5 II. Active Enforcement Efforts and Pending Matters ........................................................................... 8 III. The Liberty Reservoir and Prettyboy Reservoir Audit, May 29, 2013: What the Attorney General Learned .............................................................................................. 11 CHAPTER TWO: THE WICOMICO RIVER ........................................................................................ 14 I. Background .................................................................................................................................... 14 II. Active Enforcement and Pending Matters ..................................................................................... 16 III. The Wicomico River Audit, July 15, 2013: What the Attorney General Learned ......................... 18 CHAPTER THREE: ANTIETAM CREEK ............................................................................................ 22 I. Background .................................................................................................................................... 22 II. Active -
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 -
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. -
House Bill 1472
HOUSE BILL 1472 M2 (0lr3400) ENROLLED BILL — Environmental Matters/Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs — Introduced by Dorchester County Delegation, Somerset County Delegation, and Wicomico County Delegation Read and Examined by Proofreaders: _______________________________________________ Proofreader. _______________________________________________ Proofreader. Sealed with the Great Seal and presented to the Governor, for his approval this _______ day of _______________ at ________________________ o’clock, ________M. ______________________________________________ Speaker. CHAPTER ______ 1 AN ACT concerning 2 Hunting Wild Waterfowl – Dorchester, St. Mary’s, Somerset, and Wicomico 3 Counties 4 FOR the purpose of altering the location in which a person may hunt wild waterfowl 5 by certain methods in the waters of Dorchester, St. Mary’s, Somerset, and 6 Wicomico counties; decreasing the distance from shore that the Department of 7 Natural Resources prescribes by regulation for the hunting of wild waterfowl by 8 certain methods in the waters of Dorchester, St. Mary’s, Somerset, and 9 Wicomico counties; and generally relating to hunting wild waterfowl in the 10 waters of Dorchester, St. Mary’s, Somerset, and Wicomico counties. 11 BY repealing and reenacting, with amendments, 12 Article – Natural Resources 13 Section 10–604 through 10–606 EXPLANATION: CAPITALS INDICATE MATTER ADDED TO EXISTING LAW. [Brackets] indicate matter deleted from existing law. Underlining indicates amendments to bill. Strike out indicates matter stricken from the bill by amendment or deleted from the law by amendment. Italics indicate opposite chamber/conference committee amendments. *hb1472* 2 HOUSE BILL 1472 1 Annotated Code of Maryland 2 (2007 Replacement Volume and 2009 Supplement) 3 SECTION 1. BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF 4 MARYLAND, That the Laws of Maryland read as follows: 5 Article – Natural Resources 6 10–604.