DOCSLIB.ORG

Sramsoe124.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sramsoe124.Pdf ;: i,j ~;;'' l )' l :i w.' ,[ }),-,,, .: .. ':J;~:;·[ ,,, ' \. ~· ' .., .... ,. ·:• .... ~· ., 76° 75° 74° 73° ,. ... f_ - - ;~ ,.- ,... -.. , I I ' . ' " ,. • I ' , W-Brl71o-t¥---nil'd'fTHYf)F«J·~;r.M'I\-kMI'i~~l!t39 ESTUARIES s'.:'/ t ~- : , ~' .... ~"',.,'- ' •. .. -" :Xf. Mat~emati~ f~od~t{;f~di-~; of d~' ci~~~;Y ¢i :t e:,~i~;J~~:n~ E tuary :" .: 1 ~., ".-; \:( I ",·· f \~~~~.('I 3~~~~----~-P~~~~~--~~----~---·~-~-~-~~~~.. ~~~------+-----------~3 ' .. H,: ~-· -qtien .'· P )V: :fiyer· ·:~ ' ,_' ··.· /~<~·. K~6- ,,·~-.' ,':,' ,'" a d' ' .' '\ .r::~ .... "_..... :' ": ... · ·' ,, , , · '\ ._.:., C. S. Fang j i 1 \ I I I """. • . \· I I / f '; __ ,. • ) If I,' I). :' I 1 • ' 1 ' I 1 11 -:_::<:J ~ 1 37~~~~~--~----~.~----~~~~~.~~~-~J~~~~~~~~~~~~------~3~1 ~ ., ~ I 1 I ,' : \ I ~ ! : \ f ~ -'.'; t,Je: :v~:r~inia State Water Control ~,'/ ,': ......:..: :_,--~,' '';, i/,/ a d ·~;·~·- \:· ~.·:,V,t~ginia lnstitu e of Marine Scie ,,..._ ,. '' I II / : ' """"' I '.J I j 1 I ' I ·~ ·:, ,'·( ! Special Re ort No. 124 in 'tie~h M.ari'ne S~ien e and Ocean Eng nee ring ' . ' ,I I : ! 1 36"htJl~~~~~~+-~~~----~nn~nn~;-m·~~nnl7·~~~~~om~~~~t~~=-----:m• 36 Virginia 23062 William J. Hargis, Jr. 73. 76° 75° 74° HYDROGRAPHY AND HYDRODYNAMICS OF VIRGINIA ESTUARIES · XI. Mathematical Model Studies of Water Quality of the Piankatank Estuary by H. S. Chen P. V. Hyer A. Y. Kuo and C. S. Fang PREPARED UNDER THE COOPERATIVE STATE AGENCIES PROGRAM OF THE VIRGINIA STATE WATER CONTROL BOARD AND THE VIRGINIA INSTITUTE OF MARINE SCIENCE Project Officers Dale Jones Raymo~d Bowles Virginia State Water Control Board . Special Report No. 124 in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering Virginia Institute of Marine Science Gloucester Point, Virginia 23062 William J. Hargis, Jr. Director January~ 1977 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Tables ...... ~............................................... iii list of Figures ............................... :..................... iv Acknowledgement...................................................... v Abstract ................ ~ ...........................................·.. vi 1. Summary and Conclusion ........•.•...·..••.......•.......•........ l .2. Introduction.................................................... 3 3. Description of Study Area....................................... 7 4. Hydrographic·Survey ..............•.......•..••...•.. ·............ 9 4.1 FieldSurvey .......... ·..................................... 9 4.2 Instruments and Analysis................................... 12 4.3 Results and Discussion..................................... 12 5. Mathematical Model Study........................................ 16 5.1 s·egmentation of the River.................................. 16 5.2 Point Sources of Pollutants................................ 16 5.3 Model Calibration and Results.............................. 17 5.4 Sensitivity Analysis ...... :................................ 23 List of References .......•......•..•.....•.....•.. ~················· 32 Appendices A. The Estuary Number ................•.........·•..•..•......... 33 B. Graphical and Tabular Summary of Water Quality Data......... 35 C. Graphical Summary of Dye Data............................... 64 D. Cross-Sectional Profiles of Transects....................... 69 i i . LIST OF TABLES Table Page .8.1 Water Quality Data of Stations at Miles 0.0, 42- 3.30, 5.20, 10.10, 12.30 and 15.30......................... 53 8.6 8.7 Water Quality Data of Slack Water Surveys on June .10, 57- July 9 and 10, 1975........................................ 62 8.9 8.10 Observed Benthic D.O. Demand on June 26, 1975.............. 63 iii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page .2.1 The location of the Piankatank River..................... 4 2.2 The Piankatank River estuary of Virginia................. 5 4.1 Locations of transects at which the bathymetric. profiles were measured and the water quality and dye data were samp 1ed ................ ·. 10 4.2 C~oss-sectional areas versus distance along the r1ver.................................................... 11 5.1 Longitudinal distribution of salinity, July 9-10, l975..................................................... 19 5.2 Longitudinal distribution of dissolved oxygen, July 9-10, 1975 ........................................... 20 5.3 Longitudinal distribution of CBOD, July 9-10, 1975 ....... 21 5.4 Longitudinal distribution of NBOD, July 9-10, 1975 ....... 22 5.5 Effects of dispersion coefficient on salinity di stri buti on............................................. 24 5.6 Effects of dispersion coefficient on DO distribution ..... 25 5.7 Effects of ~ispersion coefficient on CBOD distribution ... 26 5.8 Effects of dispersion coefficient on NBOD distribution ... 27 5.9 Effects of decay rate on CBOD distribution ............... 29 5.10 Effects of decay rate on NBOD distribution ............... 30 5.11 Effects of CBOD and NBOD decay rate on DO distribution ... 31 B. 1 Time and depth variation of salinity, temperature 36- and dissolved oxygen on July 9-l 0, 1975.................. 41 · 8.6 8.7 Spatial and depth variation of salinity, temperature 54- and DO on June 10 and July 9, 10, 1975.. ... ... .. •.. ...... 56 8.9 c. 1 Longitudinal distribution of dye concentration on 65- 0ctober 14, 15, 16; 17 and 20, 1975 ...................... 68 C.4 D. 1 The cross-sectional profiles of transects measured on 70- July 1, 1975............................................. 80 D.ll iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENT We thank Messrs. Dale Jones, Raymond Bowles and Dr. Wen Kao of the State Water Control Board {SWCB) for their critical review of the manuscript of this report and for their constructive suggestions. Discussions with Ms. Arlene Rosenbaum have been helpful. We wish to thank Mr. John Jacobson for his supervision of the field study and Ms. Shirley Crossley for her patient typing of this report, and Ms. Terry Markle for her proofreading and preparation of the figures. ' This project is jointly supported by the Vitginia State Water Control Board (SWCB) and the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) through the Cooperative State Agencies (CSA) program. v ABSTRACT The Coopera~ive State Agencies (CSA) program is a continuing activity of the Virginia State Water Control Board and the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, devoted to the development of water quality predictive tools, and to the monitoring of water quality in the Virginia tidal waters. This report summarizes the field survey .of water quality and the development of a mathematical model for the Piankatank River, which is a tributary estuary of the Chesapeake Bay. An intensive water quality field survey was conducted in July 1975. An additional dye study was conducted in October 1975. The hydrographic and water quality data, combined with measured bathy­ metric profiles, were used to construct and calibrate a one-dimensional, time-dependent mathematical water quality model. The model simulates the distribution of dissolved oxygen, biochemical oxygen demand (both NBOD and CBOD) and sa li.n ity. vi 1 1. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS (1) The drainage basin of the Piankatank River is generally a rural area and almost free from the pollution of co~nercial and industrial wastes. The economy of the basin is mainly supported by the agricultural and fishing activities. The climate of the basin is classified as humid and subtropical. {2) An intensive survey was carried out on July 9 and 10, 1975. Time· series data on salinity, temperature, dissolved oxygen {DO), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), nitrogen components (TKN, ammonia, nitrate and nitrite), phosphorus, chlorophyll •a•, total coliform and fecal coliform were collected at the.surface and bottom at six anchor stations. During the same period, two slack-water runs were made, collecting the same kinds of water quality data. Before this period, one additional slack-water run had been made on June 10, 1975. An observation of the benthic oxygen demand was conducted on June 26, 1975. {3) A batch dye release was made on October 14, 1975 and dye concentration was monitored by slack-water runs made over the next several days, until October 20. {4) Tidal action in the Piankatank River is strorig, with the amplitude of tidal currents exceeding 1.0 ft/sec (30.5 em/sec) at some locations. (5) The protrusion of Stove Point Neck into the center of the river has an interesting effect on the hydrodynamic field and 2 the mixing processes, which in turn affects the dispersion and flushing of the pollutants, however, the exact nature of this role requires further study. (6) A mathematical model of water quality in the Piankatank River was constructed and calibrated. This model is a real time model, including tidal motion, with time-integration carried out by an implicit . .scheme. The variables modeled are salinity, dissolved oxygen, and both nitrogenous and carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand. {7) According to the data collected for this study, the vertical salinity distribution is classified as a partially mixed condition, the (depth and time) average salinity varying smoothly from 14 ppt at river mouth to 10 ppt at Freeport, about 15 miles (24.2 kilometer~) upstream. The average CBOD and NBOD in the entire river are about 2.5 and 2.0 mg/£ respectively. The surface DO distribution varies approximately from 8 mg/£ at river mouth to 6.2 mg/£ at Freeport. The vertical distribution of the DO on the other hand indicates a significant benthic DO demand. The critical DO was observed to be equal or less than 3 mg/£ on the bottom of the river along the river upstream from
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Blue Catfish in Virginia Historical Perspective & Importance To
    Blue Catfish in Virginia Historical Perspective & Importance to Recreational Fishing David K. Whitehurst [email protected] Blue Catfish Introductions to James River & Rappahannock River 1973 - 1977 N James River Tidal James River Watershed Rappahannock River Tidal Rappahannock Watershed USGS Hydrologic Boundaries Blue Catfish Introduced to Mattaponi River in 1985 Blue CatfishFollowed ( Ictalurus by Colonization furcatus ) Introductions of the Pamunkey York River River System Mattaponi River 1985 Pamunkey River ???? N James River Tidal James River Watershed Rappahannock River Tidal Rappahannock Watershed York River Tidal York Watershed USGS Hydrologic Boundaries Blue Catfish Established in Potomac River – Date ? Blue Catfish ( Ictalurus furcatus ) Introductions EstablishedConfirmed in in Potomac Piankatank River (SinceRiver ????)– 2002 Recently Discovered in Piankatank River N Piankatank / Dragon Swamp Tidal Potomac - Virginia James River Tidal James River Watershed Rappahannock River Tidal Rappahannock Watershed York River Tidal York Watershed USGS Hydrologic Boundaries Blue Catfish Now Occur in all Major Virginia Blue Catfish ( Ictalurus furcatus ) Tributaries of Chesapeake Bay All of Virginia’s Major Tidal River Systems of Chesapeake Bay Drainage 2003 N Piankatank / Dragon Swamp Tidal Potomac - Virginia Tidal James River Watershed Tidal Rappahannock Watershed Tidal York Watershed USGS Hydrologic Boundaries Stocking in Virginia – Provide recreational and food value to anglers – Traditional Fisheries Management => Stocking – Other species introduced to Virginia tidal rivers: – Channel Catfish, – Largemouth Bass, – Smallmouth Bass, – Common carp, …. Blue catfish aside, as of mid-1990’s freshwater fish community in Virginia tidal waters dominated by introduced species. Blue Catfish Introductions Widespread Important Recreational Fisheries • Key factors determining this “success” – Strong recruitment and good survival leading to very high abundance – Trophy fishery dependant on rapid growth and good survival > 90 lb.
    [Show full text]
  • Middle Peninsula Treatment Plants
    Middle Peninsula Treatment Plants Middlesex County is home to Deltaville, the “Boating Capitol of the King and Queen County, formed in 1691 from New Kent, was Chesapeake;” the Town of Urbanna and the official State Oyster named for King William, III and Queen Mary. The Walkerton Festival; and the restored Buyboat the F.D. Crocket, now on the Bridge spans the Mattaponi River and the adjacent pier provides a register of historic places and viewable at the Deltaville Maritime spot for enjoying the natural beauty of the area. Museum. Middlesex is also the home of the most decorated member of the Marine Corps, General Chesty Puller, and his resting place. He is King William County St. John's Church, dating from 1734, has been celebrated everyday through the Middlesex Museum in Saluda and is beautifully restored through an effort of over 80 years by the St. John's also honored yearly by a Marine Corps run through Saluda to his Church Restoration Association. resting place at Christ Church. King William Q3± Urbanna Central Middlesex Q3± MP013600 Q3± MP013700 MP013500 West Point MP013800 Q3± MP012500 MP012900 Feet Legend 0 10,00020,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 Middle Peninsula Q3± Treatment Plant Middle Peninsula Treatment Plant Service Ü CIP Location ^_ CIP Interceptor Point Area CIP Projects _ CIP PumpStation Point ± ± CIP Interceptor Line Treatment Plant Projects CIP Abandonment MP012000 MP013900 Treatment Plant Service Area MP012400 HRSD Interceptor Force Main MP013100 HRSD Interceptor Gravity Main MP013300 Q3 HRSD Treatment Plant 3SRP HRSD Pressure
    [Show full text]
  • Citations Year to Date Printed: Monday February 1 2010 Citations Enterd in Past 7 Days Are Highlighted Yellow
    Commonwealth of Virginia - Virginia Marine Resources Commission Lewis Gillingham, Tournament Director - Virginia Beach, Virginia 23451 2009 Citations Year To Date Printed: Monday February 1 2010 Citations Enterd in Past 7 Days Are Highlighted Yellow Species Caught Angler Address Release Weight Lngth Area Technique Bait 1 AMBERJACK 2009-10-06 MICHAEL A. CAMPBELL MECHANICSVILLE, VA Y 51 WRK.UNSPECIFIED OFF BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 2 AMBERJACK 2009-10-05 CHARLIE R. WILKINS I PORTSMOUTH, VA Y 59 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 3 AMBERJACK 2009-10-05 CHARLIE R. WILKINS, PORTSMOUTH, VA Y 54 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 4 AMBERJACK 2009-10-05 CHARLIE R. WILKINS I PORTSMOUTH, VA Y 52 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 5 AMBERJACK 2009-10-05 ADAM BOYETTE PORTSMOUTH, VA Y 51 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 6 AMBERJACK 2009-10-04 CHRIS BOYCE HAMPTON, VA Y 51 HANKS WRECK BAIT FISHING SQUID 7 AMBERJACK 2009-10-02 THOMAS E. COPELAND NORFOLK, VA Y 50 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 8 AMBERJACK 2009-10-02 DOUGLAS P. WALTERS GREAT MILLS, MD Y 52 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY CHUMMING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 9 AMBERJACK 2009-10-02 AARON J. ROGERS VIRGINIA BEACH, VA Y 50 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 10 AMBERJACK 2009-10-01 JAKE HILES VIRGINIA BEACH, VA Y 50 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 11 AMBERJACK 2009-09-18 LONNIE D. COOPER HOPEWELL, VA Y 53 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 12 AMBERJACK 2009-09-18 DAVE WARREN PRINCE GEORGE, VA Y 52 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 13 AMBERJACK 2009-09-18 CHARLES H.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining the Greater York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape
    Defining the Greater York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape Prepared by: Scott M. Strickland Julia A. King Martha McCartney with contributions from: The Pamunkey Indian Tribe The Upper Mattaponi Indian Tribe The Mattaponi Indian Tribe Prepared for: The National Park Service Chesapeake Bay & Colonial National Historical Park The Chesapeake Conservancy Annapolis, Maryland The Pamunkey Indian Tribe Pamunkey Reservation, King William, Virginia The Upper Mattaponi Indian Tribe Adamstown, King William, Virginia The Mattaponi Indian Tribe Mattaponi Reservation, King William, Virginia St. Mary’s College of Maryland St. Mary’s City, Maryland October 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As part of its management of the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail, the National Park Service (NPS) commissioned this project in an effort to identify and represent the York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape. The work was undertaken by St. Mary’s College of Maryland in close coordination with NPS. The Indigenous Cultural Landscape (ICL) concept represents “the context of the American Indian peoples in the Chesapeake Bay and their interaction with the landscape.” Identifying ICLs is important for raising public awareness about the many tribal communities that have lived in the Chesapeake Bay region for thousands of years and continue to live in their ancestral homeland. ICLs are important for land conservation, public access to, and preservation of the Chesapeake Bay. The three tribes, including the state- and Federally-recognized Pamunkey and Upper Mattaponi tribes and the state-recognized Mattaponi tribe, who are today centered in their ancestral homeland in the Pamunkey and Mattaponi river watersheds, were engaged as part of this project. The Pamunkey and Upper Mattaponi tribes participated in meetings and driving tours.
    [Show full text]
  • Middlesex County, Virginia
    Middlesex County, Virginia VIRGINIA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP www.YesVirginia.org Community Profile Middlesex County State Map Only a few locations can guarantee the right combination of resources that are crucial to your business’s success. Virginia’s premier location offers excellent domestic and international access. Centrally located on the U.S. East Coast, 40 percent of the U.S. population is within a day’s drive, and our integrated transportation system of highways, railroads, airports and seaports ensures that you can reach every one of your markets efficiently. Close proximity to Washington, D.C. facilitates contact with policy makers and the federal government system. Virginia continues to rank among America’s leading states for business by CNBC and Forbes.com. Business-first values, easy access to markets, stable and competitive operating costs, and a talented workforce all drove Virginia to the top. This unique combination of assets has encouraged businesses to prosper here for more than 400 years. Like you, they searched the world over for that convergence of resources that would help ensure their prosperity. For them, their search ended here. Chances are yours will too. • AAA bond rating- Virginia has maintained a AAA rating since 1938, longer than any other state. • Right-to-work law allows individuals the right to work regardless of membership in a labor union or organization. • Corporate income tax rate of 6% has not been increased since 1972. • Headquarters to 37 Fortune 1000 firms. • Headquarters to 52 firms each with annual revenue over $1 billion. • More than 17,300 high-tech establishments operate in Virginia.
    [Show full text]
  • Middle Peninsula Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy
    2021 Middle Peninsula Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Commission Approval 3/24/21 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 5 CEDS STRATEGY COMMITTEE ........................................................................... 6 PART I – ECONOMIC FABRIC OF THE MIDDLE PENINSULA OF VA .......... 8 PART II – REGIONAL OVERVIEW ..................................................................... 16 PART III – THE CEDS STRATEGY AND PROCESS ......................................... 54 PART IV–COASTAL ECONOMIC RESILIENCY ............................................... 97 CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................... 97 APPENDIX .............................................................................................................. 98 Middle Peninsula of Virginia Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy 2021 This document was approved by the MPPDC Commission on June 24, 2020. Executive Summary The Middle Peninsula Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) is designed to bring together the public and private sectors in the creation of an economic roadmap to diversify and strengthen the region’s economic fabric. Integrating, coordinating, supporting and collaborating on local and regional economic development planning provides the flexibility to adapt to
    [Show full text]
  • Bay Grasses Backgrounder
    Bay Grasses Backgrounder - Page 1 of 5 Upper Bay Zone In the Upper Bay Zone (21 segments extending south from the Susquehanna River to the Bay Bridge), underwater bay grasses increased 21 percent from 18,922 acres in 2007 to 22,954 acres in 2008. Ten of the 21 segments increased by at least 20 percent and by at least 12 acres from 2007 totals: 21%, Northern Chesapeake Bay Segment: 1,833 acres (2007) vs. 1,008 acres (2008) 21%, Northern Chesapeake Bay Segment 2: 11,725 acres (2007) vs. 14,194 acres (2008) 59%, Northeast River: 116 acres (2007) vs. 183 acres (2008) 70%, Upper Chesapeake Bay: 373 acres (2007) vs. 633 acres (2008) 50%, Sassafras River Segment: 1,368 acres (2007) vs. 551 acres (2008) 1204%, Sassafras River Segment 2: 5 acres (2007) vs. 52 acres (2008) 40%, Gunpowder River Segment 1: 558 acres (2007) vs. 783 acres (2008) 50%, Middle River: 551 acres (2007) vs. 828 acres (2008) 53%, Upper Central Chesapeake Bay: 124 acres (2007) vs. 188 acres (2008) 23%, Lower Chester River: 67 acres (2007) vs. 84 acres (2008) None of the 21 segments decreased by at least 20 percent and by at least 12 acres from 2007 totals. Two of the 21 segments remained unvegetated in 2008. Acres of SAV & Goal Attained Upper Chesapeake Bay Region Segment 2007 2008 Restoration Goal 2008 % of goal Northern Chesapeake Bay Segment 1 834 1007 754 134 Northern Chesapeake Bay Segment 2 11726 14194 12149 117 Northern Chesapeake Bay Total 12560 15202 12903 118 Northeast River 115 183 89 205 Elk River Segment 1 1590 1907 1844 103 Elk River Segment 2 391 440 190 232
    [Show full text]
  • Mathews County Shoreline Management Plan
    Mathews County Shoreline Management Plan Shoreline Studies Program Virginia Institute of Marine Science College of William & Mary March 2010 Mathews County Shoreline Management Plan Prepared for Mathews County and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation C. Scott Hardaway, Jr.* Donna A. Milligan* Carl H. Hobbs, III Christine A. Wilcox* Kevin P. O’Brien* Lyle Varnell *Shoreline Studies Program Virginia Institute of Marine Science College of William & Mary Gloucester Point, Virginia Special Report in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering No. 417 of the Virginia Institute of Marine Science This project was funded by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation through Grant Number 2007-0081-014 March 2010 Project Summary The Mathews County Shoreline Management Plan (Plan) is the result of cooperative work between Mathews County and the Shoreline Studies Program and the Center for Resource Management at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science. The work was funded by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation through their Chesapeake Bay Small Watershed Grants Program. The goal of the project is to create an easy-to-use Plan that landowners in Mathews County can use to initiate shore management strategies that stabilize their shoreline in an environmentally- friendly way. This report has several sections. General coastal zone management considerations and existing conditions along the Mathews County shoreline are discussed. The overall Mathews shoreline was divided into three reaches: Reach 1, Piankatank River, Hills Bay, and Queens Creek; Reach 2, New Point Comfort to Gwynn’s Island including Milford Haven; and Reach 3, Mobjack Bay, East River, and North River. Each reach is discussed in terms of specific shore conditions as well as design considerations and shore stabilization recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • Shoreline Situation Report Gloucester County, Virginia Gary F
    College of William and Mary W&M ScholarWorks Reports 1976 Shoreline Situation Report Gloucester County, Virginia Gary F. Anderson Virginia Institute of Marine Science Gaynor B. Williams Virginia Institute of Marine Science Margaret H. Peoples Virginia Institute of Marine Science Lee Weishar Virginia Institute of Marine Science Robert J. Byrne 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 Environmental Indicators and Impact Assessment Commons, Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Recommended Citation Anderson, G. F., Williams, G. B., Peoples, M. H., Weishar, L., Byrne, R. J., & Hobbs, C. H. (1976) Shoreline Situation Report Gloucester County, Virginia. Special Report In Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering No. 83. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary. https://doi.org/10.21220/V55Q86 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 Gary F. Anderson, Gaynor B. Williams, Margaret H. Peoples, Lee Weishar, Robert J. Byrne, and Carl H. Hobbs III This report is available at W&M ScholarWorks: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/reports/748 Shoreline Situation Report GLOUCESTER COUNTY, VIRGINIA Supported by the National Science Foundation, Research Applied to National Needs Program NSF Grant Nos. GI 34869 and GI 38973 to the Wetlands/Edges Program, Chesapeake Research Consortium, Inc. Published With Funds Provided to the Commonwealth by the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Grant No.
    [Show full text]
  • 'It's a Big Deal'
    GLOUCESTERMATHEWS THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2020 VOL. LXXXIII, no. 46 NEW SERIES (USPS 220-560) GLOUCESTER, VA. 23061 | MATHEWS, VA. 23109 two sections 28 pages 75 CENTS COVID-19 Supervisor’s comments numbers called into question BY TYLER BASS week in reference to a ques- rise, yet at tion that was asked from one Comments that Gloucester of our board members in ref- supervisor Mike Winebarger erence to African American made during the Oct. 20 joint history,” said Smith. “They slower rate meeting of the Gloucester heard that it was going to BY SHERRY HAMILTON County Board of Supervisors be taught at Gloucester High and School Board were called School and that it was going In the midst of a nationwide into question last Wednesday, to be a requirement for gradu- surge of the coronavirus pan- during the supervisors’ Nov. ation. I found that to be very demic, the number of cases in 4 meeting. offensive to me as the only Af- Virginia is also accelerating, Fellow board member Kevin rican American board mem- but at a slower rate, accord- Smith and several concerned ber sitting here.” ing to Dr. Richard Williams, Gloucester residents voiced Smith was then interrupted director of the Three Rivers their opinions regarding a by Bazzani, who attempted to Health District. question that Winebarger prevent disparagement of any The U.S. as a whole recorded had asked Gloucester County of the board members on the a seven-day moving average School Superintendent Dr. stage, but Smith continued of over 119,000 cases—an all- Walter Clemons. despite the chair’s wishes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Status of Virginia's Public Oyster Resource 2015
    The Status of Virginia’s Public Oyster Resource 2015 MELISSA SOUTHWORTH and ROGER MANN Molluscan Ecology Program Department of Fisheries Science Virginia Institute of Marine Science The College of William and Mary Gloucester Point, VA 23062 March 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I. OYSTER RECRUITMENT IN VIRGINIA DURING 2015 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 3 METHODS ......................................................................................................................... 3 RESULTS ........................................................................................................................... 4 James River ..................................................................................................................... 5 Piankatank River ............................................................................................................. 6 Great Wicomico River .................................................................................................... 7 DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................................... 8 PART II. DREDGE SURVEY OF SELECTED OYSTER BARS IN VIRGINIA DURING 2015 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 23 METHODS ....................................................................................................................... 23 RESULTS
    [Show full text]
  • Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Water Trail Statement of National Significance
    CAPTAIN JOHN SMITH CHESAPEAKE NATIONAL HISTORIC WATER TRAIL STATEMENT OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE John S. Salmon, Project Historian 1. Introduction and Findings This report evaluates the national significance of the trail known as the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Water Trail, which incorporates those parts of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries that Smith explored primarily on two voyages in 1608. The study area includes parts of four states—Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, and Pennsylvania—and the District of Columbia. Two bills introduced in the United States Congress (entitled the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Watertrail Study Act of 2005) authorized the Secretary of the Interior to “carry out a study of the feasibility of designating the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Watertrail as a national historic trail.” Senator Paul S. Sarbanes (Maryland) introduced S.B. 336 on February 9, 2005, and Senators George Allen (Virginia), Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (Delaware), Barbara A. Mikulski (Maryland), and John Warner (Virginia) cosponsored it. The bill was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks on April 28. On May 24, 2005, Representative Jo Ann Davis (Virginia) introduced H.R. 2588 in the House of Representatives, and 19 other Representatives from the four relevant states signed on as cosponsors. The bill, which is identical to Senate Bill 336, was referred to the House Committee on Resources on May 24, and to the Subcommittee on National Parks on May 31. On August 2, 2005, President George W. Bush authorized the National Park Service to study the feasibility of establishing the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Water Trail as part of the FY 2006 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.
    [Show full text]