DOCSLIB.ORG

Northeastern Jones Falls Small Watershed Action Plan Volume 2: Appendices D & E

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Northeastern Jones Falls Small Watershed Action Plan Volume 2: Appendices D & E Northeastern Jones Falls Small Watershed Action Plan Volume 2: Appendices D & E January 2013 December 2012 Final Prepared by: Baltimore County Department of Environmental Protection and Sustainability In Consultation with: Northeastern Jones Falls SWAP Steering Committee NORTHEASTERN JONES FALLS SMALL WATERSHED ACTION PLAN VOLUME II: APPENDICES D & E Appendix D Northeastern Jones Falls Characterization Report Appendix E Applicable Total Maximum Daily Loads APPENDIX D NORTHEASTERN JONES FALLS CHARACTERIZATION REPORT A-1 Northeastern Jones Falls Characterization Report Final December 2012 NORTHEASTERN JONES FALLS CHARACTERIZATION REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose of the Characterization 1-1 1.2 Location and Scale of Analysis 1-1 1.3 Report Organization 1-5 CHAPTER 2 LANDSCAPE AND LAND USE 2.1 Introduction 2-1 2.2 The Natural Landscape 2-2 2.2.1 Climate 2-2 2.2.2 Physiographic Province and Topography 2-2 2.2.2.1 Location and Watershed Delineation 2-2 2.2.2.2 Topography 2-3 2.2.3 Geology 2-4 2.2.4 Soils 2-7 2.2.4.1 Hydrologic Soil Groups 2-7 2.2.4.2 Soil Erodibility 2-9 2.2.5 Forest 2-11 2.2.5.1 Forest Cover 2-11 2.2.6 Stream Systems 2-11 2.2.6.1 Stream System Characteristics 2-12 2.2.6.2 Stream Riparian Buffers 2-14 2.3 Human Modified Landscape 2-16 2.3.1 Land Use and Land Cover 2-16 2.3.2 Population 2-19 2.3.3 Impervious Surfaces 2-21 2.3.4 Drinking Water 2-24 2.3.4.1 Public Water Supply 2-24 2.3.5 Waste Water 2-24 2.3.5.1 Septic Systems 2-24 2.3.5.2 Public Sewer 2-24 2.3.5.3 Waste Water Treatment Facilities 2-26 2.3.6 Storm Water 2-26 2.3.6.1 Storm Drainage System 2-26 2.3.6.2 Stormwater Management Facilities 2-27 2.3.7 NPDES Discharge Permits 2-29 2.3.8 Zoning 2-30 2.3.9 Historic Development 2-33 CHAPTER 3 WATER QUALITY AND LIVING RESOURCES 3.1 Introduction 3-1 3.2 Water Quality Monitoring Data 3-1 3.2.1 Chemical Data 3-1 3.2.2 Biological Data 3-4 3.2.3 Illicit Discharge and Elimination Data 3-6 3.2.4 Subwatershed Summary 3-8 3.3 Stream Assessments 3-8 3.3.1 Stream Corridor Assessment 3-8 3.3.1.1 Assessment Protocol 3-8 3.3.1.2 Summary of Sites Investigated 3-9 3.3.1.3 General Findings 3-10 3.4 Sewer Overflow Impacts 3-18 3.5 303(d) Listings and Total Maximum Daily Loads 3-21 3.5.1 Nutrients 3-22 3.5.2 Bacteria 3-22 3.5.3 Chlordane 3-23 3.5.4 Chesapeake Bay TMDL 3-23 3.6 Subwatershed Pollutant Loading Analysis 3-23 3.7 Stormwater Management Facilities 3-24 3.7.1 Stormwater Management Facility Conversion 3-24 Assessment 3.7.2 Stormwater Management Facility Pollutant Load 3-27 Calculations 3.7.2.1 Existing Facility Pollutant Removal 3-27 3.7.2.2 Additional Pollutant Removal Based on 3-29 Conversions of Detention Ponds 3.9 References 3-29 CHAPTER 4 UPLAND ASSESSMENTS 4.1 Introduction 4-1 4.2 Neighborhood Source Assessments (NSA) 4-1 4.2.1 Assessment Protocol 4-1 4.2.2 Summary of Sites Investigated 4-2 4.2.3 General Findings 4-2 4.2.3.1 Downspout Disconnection 4-2 4.2.3.2 Street Sweeping 4-4 4.2.3.3 High Lawn Maintenance 4-4 4.2.3.4 Bayscaping 4-7 4.2.3.5 Street Trees 4-9 4.3 Hotspot Site Investigations (HSI) 4-11 4.3.1 Assessment Protocol 4-11 4.3.2 Summary of Sites Investigated 4-12 4.3.3 General Findings 4-14 4.4 Institutional Site Investigations (ISI) 4-14 4.4.1 Assessment Protocol 4-14 4.4.2 Summary of Sites Investigated 4-16 4.4.3 General Findings 4-18 4.5 Pervious Area Assessments (PAA) 4-18 4.5.1 Assessment Protocol 4-18 4.5.2 Summary of Sites Investigated 4-18 4.5.3 General Findings 4-19 CHAPTER 5 RESTORATION AND PRESERVATION OPTIONS 5.1 Introduction 5-1 5.2 Municipal Capital Programs 5-1 5.2.1 Stormwater Management 5-1 5.2.1.1 Detention Pond Conversion 5-1 5.2.1.2 Stormwater Retrofits 5-2 5.2.1.3 Parking Lot Alley Retrofits 5-2 5.2.2 Stream Corridor Restoration 5-2 5.2.3 Reforestation-Buffers & Open Space 5-3 5.3 Municipal Management Programs 5-4 5.3.1 Street Sweeping 5-3 5.3.2 Inlet Cleaning 5-3 5.3.3 Illicit Discharge Detection & Elimination Program 5-3 5.3.4 Land Development Review 5-4 5.3.4.1 Riparian Forest Buffers 5-4 5.3.4.2 Forest Conservation 5-4 5.3.4.3 Chesapeake Bay Critical Area 5-4 5.3.4.4 Groundwater Management 5-5 5.3.4.5 Stormwater Management 5-5 5.3.4.6 Erosion and Sediment Control 5-5 5.3.5 Trash and Recycling 5-5 5.3.5.1 Single Stream Recycling 5-5 5.3.5.2 Household Hazardous Waste Collection 5-5 5.3.6 Pollution Prevention: Public Lands Management 5-6 5.4 Volunteer Restoration Programs 5-6 5.4.1 Stream Watch Program 5-6 5.4.2 Stream Clean Ups 5-6 5.4.3 Downspout Disconnection 5-6 5.4.4 Street Trees 5-7 5.4.5 Reforestation-Buffers and Open Space 5-7 5.4.6 Storm Drain Marking 5-7 5.4.7 Parking Lot/Alley Retrofits 5-7 5.5 Business and Institutional Initiatives 5-6 5.5.1 Impervious Cover Removal 5-7 5.5.2 Parking Lot Retrofits 5-7 5.5.3 Open Space Planting 5-8 5.5.4 Pollution Prevention: Private Lands Management 5-8 5.6 Citizen Awareness Activities 5-8 5.6.1 Stormwater Runoff 5-8 5.6.2 Pet Waste/Bacteria Awareness 5-9 5.6.3 Fertilizer Reduction 5-9 5.6.4 Trash and Recycling 5-9 5.6.4.1 Compost Bins 5-9 5.6.4.2 Stewardship Projects 5-9 5.6.4.3 Reuse Directory 5-9 5.6.4.4 The Re-Source Newsletter 5-9 5.6.5 Conservation Landscaping 5-10 5.6.6 MD Green School Award 5-10 List of Tables 1-1 Northeastern Jones Falls Subwatershed Acreages…………………………… 1-3 2-1 Northeastern Jones Falls Subwatershed Slope Categories...…...…………….. 2-4 2-2 Geological Composition by Subwatershed (%)……………………………... 2-4 2-3 Northeastern Jones Falls Subwatershed Hydrologic Soil Categories (acres)... 2-7 2-4 Northeastern Jones Falls Subwatershed Soil Erodibility Categories (%).….... 2-9 2-5 Northeastern Jones Falls Subwatershed Forested Area……...…….………… 2-11 2-6 Northeastern Jones Falls Stream Mileage and Density………….…………… 2-12 2-7 Land Use in the 100 Foot Riparian Buffer………………………..…………. 2-14 2-8 Northeastern Jones Falls Watershed Specific Land Use…………………….. 2-16 2-9 Northeastern Jones Falls Watershed General Land Use ………..…………… 2-17 2-10 Northeastern Jones Falls Subwatershed Population Data……………………. 2-19 2-11 Estimated Impervious Surface in the Northeastern Jones Falls Watershed….. 2-22 2-12 Sewer Piping Length…………...……………….…………………………… 2-25 2-13 Sewer Piping Length per Square Mile……..………………………………... 2-25 2-14 Sewer and Septic Hookups in the Northeastern Jones Falls…………………. 2-25 2-15 Northeastern Jones Falls Storm Drain System……...…...…………………… 2-33 2-16 Northeastern Jones Falls Stormwater Management Facilities………….……. 2-29 2-17 Northeastern Jones Falls Urban Areas Treated by SWM.……...……………. 2-29 2-18 NPDES Permits in the Northeastern Jones Falls Watershed ………….…….. 2-30 2-19 Northeastern Jones Falls Zoning……………..………………………………. 2-30 2-20 Northeastern Jones Falls Zoning by Subwatershed………………………….. 2-31 3-1 Northeastern Jones Falls Planning Area Subwatershed Abbreviations…..….. 3-3 3-2 Ratings by Nutrient Concentrations…………………………………………. 3-3 3-3 Northeastern Jones Falls Watershed Data……………………….…………… 3-4 3-4 Baltimore County Biological Monitoring Results…………………………... 3-6 3-5 Baltimore County Storm Drain Prioritization Results………………………. 3-7 3-6 Summary of Monitoring Data by Subwatershed……………………………. 3-8 3-7 Summary of SCA Results…………………………………………………… 3-10 3-8 Stream Corridor Survey Results-Number of Problems.…………………….. 3-10 3-9 Stream Corridor Survey Results-Inadequate Buffer and Erosion……………. 3-10 3-10 Documented Sewer Overflows by Year in the Northeastern Jones Falls……. 3-19 3-11 Baltimore Sewer Overflows by Subwatershed, 2001-2008…………………. 3-19 3-12 Water Quality Impairment Listings and Status……………………………… 3-21 3-13 Land Use Loadings for Northeastern Jones Falls.…..……………………….. 3-23 3-14 Nitrogen Loads by Subwatershed…………………………...……………..… 3-24 3-15 Phosphorus Loads by Subwatershed……………………………………….... 3-24 3-16 Sediment Loads by Subwatershed…………………………………………… 3-24 3-17 Potential Conversions of Dry Ponds to Improve Water Quality…………….. 3-26 3-18 Percent Removal Efficiency of BMPs………………………………………. 3-27 3-19 Removal of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Due to Existing Stormwater Facilities. 3-27 3-20 Removal of Sediment Due to Existing Stormwater Facilities……………….. 3-28 3-21 Conversions of Dry Detention Ponds-Nutrient Removals………...……...….. 3-23 3-22 Conversions of Dry Detention Ponds-Sediment Removals………………….. 3-24 4-1 Acres Addressed by Downspout Disconnection…………………………….. 4-4 4-2 Neighborhoods and Miles of Road Addressed by Street Sweeping…………. 4-8 4-3 Acres of Lawn Addressed by Fertilizer Reduction…………………………..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • RPN Spring13
    Spring 2013 Volume Forty-Nine ROLAND PARK NEWS Saying Goodbye…and Thank You…to Mille Fleurs By Kate Culotta medical school. Her residency at the University of We first became acquainted with Mille Fleurs about Maryland brought her to Maryland. Even before she 18 years ago, when fledgling florists Diane Pappas completed her medical training, she knew it wasn’t and Kathy Quinn took over the former But No going to be enough. Bunnies, a children’s clothing store in Wyndhurst When Pappas asked her husband for advice, he Station. Pappas and Quinn said, “Practice medicine first met during a two-year for a year, and if you’re certificate Florist Program not completely happy, you at Dundalk Community have my blessing to do College. Quinn wanted something else.” to leave her position with local interior designer, Rita One year later, Diane St. Clair, and Pappas was started taking classes at a practicing physician with Dundalk Community specialties in radiology and College and made a mammography. The pair ran new friend. Mille Fleurs together until It didn’t take long for two years ago, when Quinn’s Mille Fleurs, with Pappas other love, animal rescue, and Quinn at the helm, pulled at her heartstrings to make a name for itself, and pulled her away to start bringing sophisticated another adventure. floral designs and When I sat down with unparalleled service to Pappas a few weeks ago, I its clients. Even from the asked about her “it” talent. As start, the shop’s mantra I am in a creative field myself, has been “quality and I know you’ve either got it or service first.” Pappas has you don’t.
    [Show full text]
  • Gunpowder River
    Table of Contents 1. Polluted Runoff in Baltimore County 2. Map of Baltimore County – Percentage of Hard Surfaces 3. Baltimore County 2014 Polluted Runoff Projects 4. Fact Sheet – Baltimore County has a Problem 5. Sources of Pollution in Baltimore County – Back River 6. Sources of Pollution in Baltimore County – Gunpowder River 7. Sources of Pollution in Baltimore County – Middle River 8. Sources of Pollution in Baltimore County – Patapsco River 9. FAQs – Polluted Runoff and Fees POLLUTED RUNOFF IN BALTIMORE COUNTY Baltimore County contains the headwaters for many of the streams and tributaries feeding into the Patapsco River, one of the major rivers of the Chesapeake Bay. These tributaries include Bodkin Creek, Jones Falls, Gwynns Falls, Patapsco River Lower North Branch, Liberty Reservoir and South Branch Patapsco. Baltimore County is also home to the Gunpowder River, Middle River, and the Back River. Unfortunately, all of these streams and rivers are polluted by nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment and are considered “impaired” by the Maryland Department of the Environment, meaning the water quality is too low to support the water’s intended use. One major contributor to that pollution and impairment is polluted runoff. Polluted runoff contaminates our local rivers and streams and threatens local drinking water. Water running off of roofs, driveways, lawns and parking lots picks up trash, motor oil, grease, excess lawn fertilizers, pesticides, dog waste and other pollutants and washes them into the streams and rivers flowing through our communities. This pollution causes a multitude of problems, including toxic algae blooms, harmful bacteria, extensive dead zones, reduced dissolved oxygen, and unsightly trash clusters.
    [Show full text]
  • Chesapeake Bay Nontidal Network: 2005-2014
    Chesapeake Bay Nontidal Network: 2005-2014 NY 6 NTN Stations 9 7 10 8 Susquehanna 11 82 Eastern Shore 83 Western Shore 12 15 14 Potomac 16 13 17 Rappahannock York 19 21 20 23 James 18 22 24 25 26 27 41 43 84 37 86 5 55 29 85 40 42 45 30 28 36 39 44 53 31 38 46 MD 32 54 33 WV 52 56 87 34 4 3 50 2 58 57 35 51 1 59 DC 47 60 62 DE 49 61 63 71 VA 67 70 48 74 68 72 75 65 64 69 76 66 73 77 81 78 79 80 Prepared on 10/20/15 Chesapeake Bay Nontidal Network: All Stations NTN Stations 91 NY 6 NTN New Stations 9 10 8 7 Susquehanna 11 82 Eastern Shore 83 12 Western Shore 92 15 16 Potomac 14 PA 13 Rappahannock 17 93 19 95 96 York 94 23 20 97 James 18 98 100 21 27 22 26 101 107 24 25 102 108 84 86 42 43 45 55 99 85 30 103 28 5 37 109 57 31 39 40 111 29 90 36 53 38 41 105 32 44 54 104 MD 106 WV 110 52 112 56 33 87 3 50 46 115 89 34 DC 4 51 2 59 58 114 47 60 35 1 DE 49 61 62 63 88 71 74 48 67 68 70 72 117 75 VA 64 69 116 76 65 66 73 77 81 78 79 80 Prepared on 10/20/15 Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • This Special Bulletin Brings to You the Summary and Recommendations of the Whitman, Requardt and Associates Report on Lake Rolan
    SPECIAL REPORT FROM Associates, Engineers, to do an engineering study on how THE LAKE ROLAND WATERSHED FOUNDATION, INC. best to remove silt now clogging the Lake, and collecting daily at a rapid rate. This study was authorized by Baltimore This special Bulletin brings to you the Summary and City and Baltimore County. Recommendations of the Whitman, Requardt and Associates (2) The offer of free dredging services for two months by report on Lake Roland, published in July, 1974. We are Ellicott Machine Corporation, and reduced labor-operating grateful to Mr. Douglas L. Tawney, Director, Baltimore City costs by C. J. Langenfelder & Company and the Operating Bureau of Recreation and Parks, for permission to do this. Engineers Union. We alsoprovide you with a map showing where the planned (3) Theformation of a tax-exempt, non-profit community basins will be and the location of the spoil areas. organization, under the auspices of the Ruxton-Riderwood We ask you to read this carefully so that you will know the Improvement Association, known as The Lake Roland facts when the community meeting is held Monday evening, Watershed Foundation, Inc. The Foundation will act as a September 30, in the Auditorium of the Church of the Good voice for the community, and will work to insure that any Shepherd, Boyce Avenue, Ruxton, at 8P.M. At this time, Mr. conservation program for Lake Roland is carefully and John B. Gillett of Whitman, Requardt and Associates, will sensitively executed. present the project and will try to answer any questions you (4) Expression of interest in the designation of Lake may have.
    [Show full text]
  • Upstream, Downstream from Good Intentions to Cleaner Waters
    Upstream, Downstream From Good Intentions to Cleaner Waters A Ground-Breaking Study of Public Attitudes Toward Stormwater in the Baltimore Area Sponsored by the Herring Run Watershed Association and the Jones Falls Watershed Association OpinionWorks / 2008 OpinionWorks Stormwater Action Coalition The Stormwater Action Coalition is a subgroup of the Watershed Advisory Group (WAG). WAG is an informal coalition of about 20 organizations from the Baltimore Metropolitan area who come together from time to time to interact with local government on water quality issues. WAG members represent all the region’s streams and waters and recently pressed the city and county to include stormwater as one of the five topics in the 2006 Baltimore City/Baltimore County Watershed Agreement. The Stormwater Action Coalition is focused on raising public awareness about the problems caused by contaminated urban runoff. Representa- tives of the following organizations have participated in Stormwater Action Coalition activities: Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay Baltimore Harbor Watershed Association Center for Watershed Protection Chesapeake Bay Foundation Clean Water Action Environment Maryland Friends of the Patapsco Valley Gunpowder Valley Conservancy Gwynns Falls Watershed Association Herring Run Watershed Association Jones Falls Watershed Association Parks & People Foundation Patapsco/Back River Tributary Team Prettyboy Watershed Alliance Watershed 263 We extend our appreciation to our local government colleagues: Baltimore City Department of Public Works Baltimore City Department of Planning Baltimore County Department of Environmental Protection and Resource Management Baltimore Metropolitan Council And to our funders: The Keith Campbell Foundation for the Environment The Rauch Foundation The Abell Foundation The Baltimore Community Foundation The Cooper Family Fund and the Cromwell Family Fund at the Baltimore Community Foundation More than half of the study participants strongly agree that they would do more, if they just knew what to do.
    [Show full text]
  • 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....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of the Piedmont in the Savage and Relay Quadrangles, Howard, Baltimore, and Anne Arundel Counties, Maryland
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Geologic Map of the Piedmont in the Savage and Relay Quadrangles, Howard, Baltimore, and Anne Arundel Counties, Maryland By Avery Ala Drake, Jr.1 Open-File Report 98-757 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards or with the North American Stratigraphic Code. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. 'Reston, VA 1998 GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE PIEDMONT IN THE SAVAGE AND RELAY QUADRANGLES, HOWARD, BALTIMORE, AND ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTIES, MARYLAND by Avery Ala Drake, Jr. INTRODUCTION The Piedmont in the Savage and Relay quadrangles (fig. 1) is largely in Howard County, Maryland. The northeasternmost part is in Baltimore County, Maryland and about 0.03 square miles is in Anne Arundel County. Most of the area is suburban and almost all outcrops are restricted to the Patapsco, Middle Patuxent, Little Patuxent, and other stream valleys. Crystalline rocks of the central Appalachian Piedmont within these quadrangles are overlain in many places by Coastal Plain deposits of Cretaceous age. Alluvium occurs along most streams. The geology of adjacent quadrangles on the west and south has been mapped by Drake (in press, unpublished data, 1991-1997) and J.N. Roen and A.A. Drake, Jr. (in press), and that to the north and east by Crowley (1976). The tectonics of the area were interpreted by Crowley (1976) and Drake (1995). Aeromagnetic and gravity surveys of the area were interpreted by Bromery (1968).
    [Show full text]
  • The Chesapeake Bay Trust
    The Chesapeake Bay Trust Working to promote public awareness and participation in the restoration and protection of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries Annual Report 2003 From the Chairman Dear Friends of the Chesapeake Bay, With the help of many partners, volunteers, and donors, 2003 has been a terrific year for the Chesapeake Bay Trust. In 2003, the Trust was pleased to award more than $1.8 million in grants to nonprofit organizations, community groups, schools, and public agencies—an increase of nearly 50 percent from the previous year. This marks the highest level of annual grantmaking in the Trust’s 18-year history. Through this ambitious year of grantmaking, the Trust has supported hundreds of projects that benefit the Bay and involve the citizens of Maryland in the process. Trust grants helped plant stream- side forests to reduce water pollution and create important wildlife habitat. They supported innovative streambank stabilization projects—called “living shorelines”—that absorb polluted run-off and reestablish fish and crab habitat. And Trust grants gave thousands of Maryland students a greater appreciation for the Bay through hands-on experiences like skipjack trips and schoolyard habitat projects. The following pages detail these and other projects supported by the Trust at locations throughout the state. This report also summarizes other notable Trust activities in 2003, including a new scholarship, an urban watershed grant program, and a new design for the popular Treasure the Chesapeake license plate. In 2003, the Trust made significant strides in advancing its mission to promote public awareness and participation in the restoration and protection of the Chesapeake Bay and its rivers.
    [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]
  • Trip Schedule NOVEMBER 2013 – FEBRUARY 2014 the Club Is Dependent Upon the Voluntary Trail Policies and Etiquette Cooperation of Those Participating in Its Activities
    Mountain Club of Maryland Trip Schedule NOVEMBER 2013 – FEBRUARY 2014 The Club is dependent upon the voluntary Trail Policies and Etiquette cooperation of those participating in its activities. Observance of the following guidelines will enhance the enjoyment The Mountain Club of Maryland (MCM) is a non-profit organization, of everyone: founded in 1934, whose primary concern is to provide its members and • Register before the deadline. Early registration for overnight or com- guests the opportunity to enjoy nature through hiking and other activi- plicated trips is especially helpful. Leaders may close registration early ties, particularly in the mountainous areas accessible to Baltimore. when necessary to limit the size of the trip. The leader may also refuse We publish a hike and activities schedule, with varieties in location registration to persons who may not be sufficiently strong to stay with and difficulty. We welcome guests to participate in most of our activi- the group. ties. We include some specialized hikes, such as family or nature hikes. • Trips are seldom canceled, even for inclement weather. Check with We help each other, but ultimately everyone is responsible for their the leader when conditions are questionable. If you must cancel, call individual safety and welfare on MCM trips. the leader before he or she leaves for the starting point. Members and We generally charge a guest fee of $2 for non-members. This fee is guests who cancel after trip arrangements have been made are billed waived for members of other Appalachian Trail maintaining clubs. Club for any food or other expenses incurred. members, through their dues, pay the expenses associated with publish- • Arrive early.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of the Jones Falls Sewershed
    GREEN TOWSON ALLIANCE WHITE PAPER ON SEWERS AUGUST 31, 2017 IS RAW SEWAGE CONTAMINATING OUR NEIGHBORHOOD STREAMS? ANALYISIS OF THE JONES FALLS SEWERSHED ADEQUATE PUBLIC SEWER TASK FORCE OF THE GREEN TOWSON ALLIANCE: Larry Fogelson, Retired MD State Planner, Rogers Forge Resident Tom McCord, Former CFO, and MD Industry CPA, Ruxton Resident Roger Gookin, Retired Sewer Contractor, Towsongate Resident JONES FALLS SEWER SYSTEM INVESTIGATION AND REPORT It is shocking that in the year 2017, human waste is discharged into open waters. The Green Towson Alliance (GTA) believes the public has a right to know that continuing problems with the Baltimore County sanitary sewer system are probably contributing to dangerous bacteria in Lake Roland and the streams and waterways that flow into it. This paper is the result of 15 months of inquiries and analysis of information provided by the County and direct observations by individuals with expertise in various professional disciplines related to this topic. GTA welcomes additional information that might alter our analysis and disprove our findings. To date, the generalized types of responses GTA has received to questions generated by our analysis do not constitute proof, or provide assurance, that all is well. 1. The Adequate Public Sewer Task Force of the Green Towson Alliance: The purpose of this task force is to protect water quality and public health by promoting the integrity and adequacy of the sanitary sewer systems that serve the Towson area. It seeks transparency by regulators and responsible officials to assure that the sewerage systems are properly planned, maintained, and operated in a manner that meets the requirements of governing laws and regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Motor Carrier Handbook Revised DECEMBER 2014 in Cooperation With
    Maryland Motor Carrier Handbook Revised DECEMBER 2014 In Cooperation with: Maryland Port Administration Maryland Transportation Authority Maryland State Police Motor Vehicle Administration Public Service Commission Comptroller of Maryland Maryland Department of the Maryland Department of Transportation Environment Maryland Virtual Weigh Station Technology Weight: 103530 lbs Speed: 55.6 mph Length: 64.2 ft Class: 10 Flags: Overweight gross, overweight bridge, overweight axle, overweight tandems VIOLATION Spacing: 4.2 4.2 34.6 4.5 16.7 Axles: Wt.: 16.1 18.9 17.4 20.5 21.3 9.5 Disclaimer: Information contained in the Handbook regarding the various laws and regulations governing commercial motor vehicle operations in Maryland are subject to change without notice. The Handbook is produced solely as a convenience to the public and the State assumes no warranty or representation, either expressed or implied, regarding the information given or the use of any of the material provided or for unintentional omissions, errors, or misprints which appear in the Handbook. On The Cover: Maryland’s Virtual Weigh Station Program is designed to monitor select roadways to assure that vehicles comply with size and weight laws. Enforcement personnel are able to use wireless technology to access the sites remotely and can identify and stop violators. i Maryland Motor Carrier Handbook Survey 1. What do you like about the Handbook? __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________
    [Show full text]