DOCSLIB.ORG

Phase 6 Climate Change Model Findings

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Phase 6 Climate Change Model Findings Hot, Wet, and Crowded: Phase 6 Climate Change Model Findings Climate Resiliency Workgroup April 20, 2020 Lew Linker, EPA; Gary Shenk, USGS; Gopal Bhatt, Penn State; Richard Tian, UMCES; and the CBP Modeling Team [email protected] Chesapeake Bay Program Science, Restoration, Partnership 1 Key Points in Assessment of 2025 Climate Change Risk Chesapeake Bay Program Science, Restoration, Partnership • The new 2019 climate change assessment confirms the December 2017 climate change findings with a better model, providing better understanding of underlying processes, more specific findings on nutrient speciation, CSOs, wet deposition of nitrogen, etc. • Consistent assessment of violation CB4MH Deep Channel and Deep Water nonattainment from December 2017 PSC meeting to today of about 1.4% and 1.0%, respectively, even though we’ve expanded our assessment to look at EVERYTHING in the CC analysis. Elements of Chesapeake Water Quality Climate Risk Assessment Chesapeake Bay Program Science, Restoration, Partnership Assessment of 2025 Climate Change in the Airshed Chesapeake Bay Program Science, Restoration, Partnership Airshed Key Finding: Increased wet deposition N loads under increased precipitation. Assessment of 2025 Climate Change in the Watershed Chesapeake Bay Program Science, Restoration, Partnership Watershed Key Findings: Increased precipitation volume, precipitation intensity, and evapotranspiration are major determinates of changes in loads due to climate change. (Land use change beyond 2025 also increases nutrient and sediment loads.) Precipitation Volume Increasing Chesapeake Bay Program Science, Restoration, Partnership The 1991 – Projections of rainfall increase using 2000 period trend in 88-years of annual PRISM[1] data of hydrology & nutrient PRISM (red dots) and NLDAS (blue dots) data are shown loads is the Change in Rainfall Volume 2021-2030 vs. 1991-2000 basis of Major Basins PRISM Trend decisions in Youghiogheny River 2.1% the Chesapeake Patuxent River Basin 3.3% TMDL. Western Shore 4.1% There are 30 Rappahannock River Basin 3.2% years between York River Basin 2.6% 1995 and 2025. Eastern Shore 2.5% Long term James River Basin 2.2% mean Potomac River Basin 2.8% precipitation Susquehanna River Basin 3.7% increased Chesapeake Bay 3.1% and 3.1% temperature Watershed ₒ [1] Parameter-elevation Relationships on Independent Slopes Model by 1 C. Rainfall Intensity Increasing Chesapeake Bay Program Science, Restoration, Partnership Observed trend of more Partitioning of Volume into Intensity Deciles 0.7 precipitation volume in 0.6 higher intensity events 0.5 based on a century of 0.4 observations. 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 Source: Groisman et al., 2004 National average heavy precipitation event index (HPEI) for the entire year (annual, black), for August through October (ASO, blue), and for heavy events associated with tropical cyclones (TC, red). [Kunkel et al., 2010] 7 Summary of Changes in Nutrient Species Delivery Chesapeake Bay Program Science, Restoration, Partnership10% 10.8% Nitrogen Arrows show 8% 8.3% n relatively more e g 6% o increase in r t i N organic N & P or n 4% i s 2.6% PIP compared to e g 2% n 2.4% DIN or DIP. a h C 0% RYearainfall, C2025O2, P50 P50Year Rainfal l2055, CO2, P50 Temperature Temperature Trend rainfall and Ensemble median rainfall The TN & TP loads EnsembleYear 2 0median25 & Ytemperatureear 2050 temperature are steadily increasing from 2025 to 2055 18% under climate Phosphorus 26.6% 15% change but there 15.3% s is a greater u 12% r o h proportion of p 9% s o refractory N and P h P 6% in the total N & P n i 4.5% s 3% going forward. e g 3.1% n a 0% h C RYearainfall, C2025O2, P50 P50Year Rainfa ll2055, CO2, P50 TrendTem rainfallperatu rande EnsembleTem medianperature rainfall EnsembleYear 2 median025 & temperatureYear 2050 temperature Trend: projection of extrapolation of long-term trends Ensemble: 31-member ensemble of RCP4.5 GCMs 8 Estimates of Climate Only and Climate and Land Use Chesapeake Bay Program Science, Restoration, Partnership Marginal Differences in Freshwater Delivery Marginal Differences in Sediment Delivery 8% 24% 21.6% 6.7% Future Climate (2025 Land use) 7% 6.2% 21% 18.9% Future Climate & Land use 6% 18% 4.8% 14.3% 5% 4.5% 15% 12.7% 3.9% 4% 3.7% 12% 8.5%9.2% 3% 2.4%2.4% 9% 2% 6% 3.8%3.8% 1% 3% 0% 0% Marginal Differences in Nitrogen Delivery Marginal Differences in Phosphorus Delivery 16% 40% 14% 13.3% 35% 32.9% 12% 10.8% 30% 26.6% 10% 25% 8.0% 19.7% 8% 6.7% 20% 16.5% 5.6% 6% 4.7% 15% 11.8% 9.9% 4% 2.6%2.6% 10% 4.5%4.5% 2% 5% 0% 0% 2025 2035 2045 2055 2025 2035 2045 2055 Grey bar = climate only Black bar = Climate and Land Use Elements of 2025 Climate Change in the Estuary Chesapeake Bay Program Science, Restoration, Partnership Air-temperature increase: 1.06 °C Quadratic function Flow (Boon et al. 2013) 2.4% Increase Nitrogen Load 2.6% Increase Probabilistic Phosphorus Load method 2025 Sea (Kopp et al 4.5% Increase Level 2014) Rise: Sediment Load 0.22m 3.8% Increase Phase 6 Watershed Model Open boundary T: + 0.95 °C; S: + 0.18 psu (Thomas et al., 2017) Model: CH3D-ICM 10 400m-1km Resolution Bottom DO Change: 1995 to 2025 Chesapeake Bay Program Science, Restoration, Partnership Keeping all other factors constant, sea level rise and increased watershed flow reduce hypoxia in the Bay, but the predominant influence are the negative impacts of increased water column temperature. Sea Level Rise Watershed Flow Increased Temp. All Factors 11 Summer (Jun.-Sep.) Hypoxia Volume (<1 mg/l) 1991- 2000 in the Whole Bay Under 2025 WIP3 Condition 2 Base Loading SLR Heat Flow All ) 3 1.22 1.14 1.06 1.02 1.00 1 0.91 DO solubility DO 48%solubility 48% RespirationRespiration Hypoxia volume (km volume Hypoxia 43%43% StratificationStratification 9%9% 0 12 12 Elements of Hypoxia Volume Change: 1995 - 2025 Chesapeake Bay Program Science, Restoration, Partnership Heat flux 20% Sea level Nutrient rise loading 4.5% 11% 12% All factors: Hypoxia 13 Summary Hypoxia volume change by 2025 Chesapeake Bay Program Current Climate Change Only Scenarios Science, Restoration, Partnership Air-temperature Sea Level Rise: 0.22m increase: 1.06 °C Flow Tidal wetland change +2.4% est. 2025 TN +2.6% est. 2025 TP +4.5% est. 2025 Sediment +3.8 est. 2025 Open boundarydelta T: + 0.95 °C; delta S: + 0.18 psu (Thomas et al., 2017) 14 Scenarios for Estimated Future Land Use and Chesapeake Bay Program Science, Restoration, Partnership Estuarine Practices for 2035, 2045, and 2055 Oyster aquaculture expansion Land use change 7 times the calibration by 2025 Up to 1% increase in TN and 2% in TP Tidal wetland change 15 The CBP Climate Change Assessment Achievement of Deep Channel DO water quality standard expressed as a incremental increase over the PSC agreed to (December 2017; July 2018) 2025 nutrient targets for growth and Conowingo Infill 2025 Climate 2035 Climate 2035 Climate 2045 Climate 2045 Climate 2055 Climate 2055 Climate 2025 Land Use 2025 Land Use 2035 Land Use 2025 Land Use 2045 Land Use 2025 Land Use 2055 Land Use 204TN 208TN 209TN 212TN 213TN 220TN 222TN 14.0TP 14.6TP 14.7TP 15.4TP 15.7TP 16.7TP 17.1TP 1993-1995 1993-1995 1993-1995 1993-1995 1993-1995 1993-1995 1993-1995 CB DO Deep DO Deep DO Deep DO Deep DO Deep DO Deep DO Deep Segment State Channel Channel Channel Channel Channel Channel Channel CB3MH MD 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% CB4MH MD 1.4% 2.9% 3.1% 4.5% 5.2% 6.9% 8.2% CB5MH MD 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% CB5MH VA 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% POTMH MD 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% RPPMH VA 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% ELIPH VA 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% CHSMH MD 1.1% 1.6% 1.6% 2.2% 2.2% 3.3% 3.3% Achievement of Deep Water DO Water Quality Standard Achievement of Deep Water DO water quality standard expressed as a incremental increase over the PSC agreed to (December 2017; July 2018) 2025 nutrient targets for growth and Conowingo infill 2025 Climate 2035 Climate 2035 Climate 2045 Climate 2045 Climate 2055 Climate 2055 Climate 2025 Land Use 2025 Land Use 2035 Land Use 2025 Land Use 2045 Land Use 2025 Land Use 2055 Land Use 204TN 208TN 209TN 212TN 213TN 220TN 222TN 14.0TP 14.6TP 14.7TP 15.4TP 15.7TP 16.7TP 17.1TP 1993-1995 1993-1995 1993-1995 1993-1995 1993-1995 1993-1995 1993-1995 CB DO Deep DO Deep DO Deep DO Deep DO Deep DO Deep DO Deep Segment State Water Water Water Water Water Water Water CB3MH MD 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% CB4MH MD 1.0% 1.6% 1.6% 2.0% 2.1% 2.6% 2.9% CB5MH MD 0.5% 0.9% 1.0% 1.3% 1.3% 1.6% 1.6% CB5MH VA 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% CB6PH VA 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% CB7PH VA 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% PATMH MD 0.0% 0.7% 0.7% 2.0% 2.2% 3.0% 3.0% MAGMH MD 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.2% -0.2% 0.4% SOUMH MD 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% SEVMH MD 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% PAXMH MD 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% POTMH MD 0.1% 0.3% 0.4% 0.7% 0.7% 0.9% 1.0% RPPMH VA 0.2% 1.2% 1.4% 1.7% 1.8% 1.9% 1.9% YRKPH VA 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% ELIPH VA 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% SBEMH VA 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.5% 0.6% 3.3% 4.0% CHSMH MD 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% EASMH MD 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.4% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% Achievement of Open Water DO Water Quality Standard 2025 Climate 2035 Climate 2035 Climate 2045 Climate 2045 Climate 2055 Climate 2055 Climate 2025 Land Use 2025 Land Use 2035 Land Use 2025 Land Use 2045 Land Use 2025 Land Use 2055 Land Use 204TN 208TN 209TN 212TN 213TN 220TN 222TN 14.0TP 14.6TP 14.7TP 15.4TP 15.7TP 16.7TP 17.1TP 1993-1995 1993-1995 1993-1995 1993-1995 1993-1995
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Savage River State Forest Is a Natural Area with Hunting Is Permitted Throughout the Forest
    DIRECTIONS Take Exit 22 off I-68, turn left and go south on Chestnut Ridge WELCOME Please Play Safe! HUNTING Savage River Reservoir Road. At the stop sign, turn left onto New Germany Road. Savage River State Forest is a natural area with Hunting is permitted throughout the forest. The Savage River Reservoir provides fishing and Continue for two miles. Turn right onto Headquarters Lane certain hazards such as overhanging branches, Boundaries are marked with yellow paint. No paddling opportunities. Boat launches are located and continue to the forest office on the right. rocky and slippery trails, and venomous hunting allowed where there are safety zone signs or at Big Run State Park, Dry Run Road and near the snakes. Bottles of water and sturdy shoes are where posted by private landowners. Hunters should breast of the dam. No gasoline motors are permitted. Approximately 3 hours from Washington, D.C./Baltimore, 2 hours from Pittsburgh. recommended while exploring, as well as blaze consult the Maryland Hunting Guide — available at Anglers can catch Catfish, Trout, Bass and Tiger orange clothing during hunting seasons. Some of dnr.maryland.gov/huntersguide — for exact season Muskie. Depending on the season, visitors may More information is available at dnr.maryland.gov/ the forest trails are gravel roads, which are open dates and bag limits. see grouse, great blue herons, king fishers, minks publiclands/western/savageriverforest.asp or by contacting to motor vehicles at various times. Remember, and eagles as well. Swimming in the Reservoir is the forest office. you are responsible for having the necessary Several access roads are available to hunters with prohibited.
    [Show full text]
  • The Zoogeography of the Fishes of the Youghiogheny River System
    The Zoogeographyof the Fishes of the Youghiogheny River System,Pennsylvania, Maryland and West Virginia MICHAEL L. HENDRICKS RMC-MuddyRun EcologicalLaboratory, P. 0. Box 10, Drumore,Pennsylvania 17518 JAY R. STAUFFER, JR. Universityof Maryland,Center for Environmentaland EstuarineStudies, Appalachian Environmental Laboratory,Frostburg 21532 CHARLES H. HOCUTT Universityof Maryland,Center for Environmentaland EstuarineStudies, Horn PointEnvironmental Laboratories,Cambridge 21613; andDepartment ofIchthyology and FisheriesScience, Rhodes University, Grahamstown,South Africa 6140 ABSTRACT: A total of 266 fish collectionswere made at 172 stationsin the YoughioghenyRiver drainage, the largest tributary to theMonongahela River. Collec- tionswere made usingseines, electrofishing gear, gillnets and trapnets. A comprehensiveliterature review yielded 99 speciesof fishesreported from the YoughioghenyRiver system.Six species collectedduring this survey(Amia calva, Carassiusauratus, Ericymba buccata, Notropis rubellus, Ictalurus catus and Fundulusdiaphanus) establishednew distributional records for the system, increasing the total to 105 species. Of thistotal, 78 specieswere verified either by our collections(57 species),museum records(10) or stockingrecords (11), whereas27 could not be verified.Of the 27 unverifiedspecies, 21 are expectedto occurand six are consideredmisidentifications or erroneousrecords. An additional24 speciesare expectedto have occurredhistorically in the Youghioghenyor have the potentialto do so based on theirdistribution in the
    [Show full text]
  • 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
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary for Youghiogheny River Fisheries Management Plan 2015
    Executive Summary for Youghiogheny River Fisheries Management Plan 2015 The purpose of the 2012 and 2014 surveys of the Youghiogheny River was to evaluate water quality and fish species occurrence in Sections 02 through 06, assess the river’s naturally reproducing gamefish populations (particularly Smallmouth Bass and Walleye), assess the results of fingerling stocking of Brown Trout and Rainbow Trout in Sections 02 to 05 (from the mouth of the Casselman River downstream to the dam at South Connellsville), assess the efficacy of annual Muskellunge stocking in Section 06 (from the dam at South Connellsville downstream to the mouth at McKeesport), and to update the fisheries management recommendations for the Youghiogheny River. All of the section and site data for the Youghiogheny River sampled in 2012 and 2014 were improved over the historic sampling numbers for water quality, fish diversity, and fish abundance. Smallmouth Bass made up the bulk of the available fishery at all sites sampled in 2012 and 2014. The water quality improvement was in large part due to the reduction of acid mine drainage from the Casselman River. This improvement in alkalinity was observed in the Youghiogheny River at Section 02 just below the mouth of the Casselman River, with an increase to 20 mg/l in 2012 from 11 mg/l in 1989. Section 03 (from the confluence of Ramcat Run downstream to the Route 381 Bridge at Ohiopyle) alkalinity improved from 13 mg/l in 1989 to 22 mg/l in 2012. Recreational angling in the Youghiogheny River for a variety of species has increased over the last fifteen years based on local reports.
    [Show full text]
  • Download the Southern Youghiogheny River Report
    10 Southern Youghiogheny River STATES: Pennsylvania THREAT: Natural gas development AT RISK: Clean drinking water, recreation SUMMARY PHOTO: SCOTT TAYLOR Despite recent improvements to river health, the Southern Youghiogheny THE RIVER River faces a critical tipping point in 2020. Beloved for its fishing, paddling In the Algonquin language, Youghiogheny means “a stream flowing in a contrary direction,” a and swimming opportunities, and reference to the river’s unique northerly course. This part of the river has its roots in coal drinking water supply for almost 75 mining, logging and the nearby steel industry, and many residents were raised here by families municipalities, the Southern who settled along its banks. Affectionately called the “Yough,” the river flows 134 miles north Youghiogheny is being overrun by from West Virginia and Maryland to Western Pennsylvania, where it empties into the natural gas development, including fracking wells, tanks, pipelines, Monongahela River in McKeesport. Along its course, the river flows through forest, farmland freshwater pump operations — and a and residential areas. The river is popular for whitewater kayaking and rafting, drawing new power plant may soon get the paddlers from across the region to enjoy class II-III rapids. Downstream of the whitewater green light. Unless Gov. Tom Wolf of stretch, the Yough flows quietly through the Appalachian ridges parallel to the Great Allegheny Pennsylvania demands a thorough, Passage trail, passing wooded riverbanks, small towns and riverside parks. The section of the landscape-scale assessment of river that is best known for whitewater is locally referred to as the “Lower Yough.” South of the potential impacts to this treasured Lower Yough, as the river nears Monogahela River is the threatened area referred to in this river, the health and welfare of report.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology, Geography, and Climate Description
    GEOLOGY, GEOGRAPHY and CLIMATE In the geologic past, horizontal beds of sedimentary rocks were deposited in what is now Garrett County, Maryland. These beds were buried, indurated, and folded to form a series of anticlinal and synclinal structures which parallel each other and run northeast and southwestw&rd. Erosion and deep incision by stream action of these structures has produced the broad rolling upland of the Allegheny Plateau which covers the entire county. The Friendsville site (18 GA 23) lies within the lower Youghiogheny syncline or coal basin on west bank of the Youghiogheny River. The Youghiogheny Valley is 1500 feet above sea level while most of the rest of the county is above 2000 feet with an average elevation between 2300 and 2U00 feet. To the south and east Backbone and Meadow Mountains form part of the major divide which separates the stream drainage of Garrett County into the Potomac River and the Atlantic Ocean from the drainage of the Upper Ohio Valley which eventually empties into the Gulf of Mexico. The Youghiogheny River which flows northward, parallel to the western border of Garrett County, and eventually crosses into Pennsylvania where it joins with the Monongahela River is part of the Upper Ohio drainage system. The course of the Youghiogheny is relatively straight since it flows along the axis of a northward trending syncline. South of Friendsville there is little room between the narrow valley walls for a flood-plain except at one or two curves where several terraces over- look the river. From about one mile south of Friendsville to Pennsylvania the stream flows through a broad valley with a wide flood-plain in one or both sides of the channel.
    [Show full text]
  • 7 Sensitive Areas Garrett County’S Physical Landscape Is Characterized by Mountainous Ridges, Stream Valleys, Extensive Forests, and Productive Agricultural Areas
    2008 Garrett County Comprehensive Plan 7 Sensitive Areas Garrett County’s physical landscape is characterized by mountainous ridges, stream valleys, extensive forests, and productive agricultural areas. The County is home to the four highest mountains in Maryland, the state’s first designated Scenic and Wild River (the Youghiogheny River), and the state’s largest freshwater lake (Deep Creek Lake). These features are scenic and recreational resources for the County’s residents and visitors, and many are also environmentally sensitive. The Planning Act of 1992 and subsequent legislation requires each comprehensive plan in Maryland to establish goals and policies related to sensitive environmental areas, specifically addressing: • Steep slopes, • Streams, wetlands, and their buffers, • 100-year floodplains, • The habitat of threatened or endangered species, • Agricultural and forest land intended for resource protection or conservation, and • Other areas in need of special protection. The County’s Sensitive Areas Ordinance (adopted in 1997) and Floodplain Management Ordinance (adopted in 1991) provide detailed guidance for development affecting these sensitive areas. This chapter updates the 1995 Plan’s description of the County’s sensitive areas, and, in conjunction with the Water Resources and Land Use chapters of this Plan, further strengthens policies to protect sensitive areas. This chapter includes a discussion of ridgelines as a sensitive area in need of protection. 7.1 Goals and Objectives The County’s sensitive areas goal is: Continue to protect Garrett County’s sensitive environmental resources and natural features. The objectives for achieving this goal are: 1. Limit development in and near sensitive environmental areas, including steep slopes, streams, wetlands, 100-year floodplains, and the habitats of threatened or endangered species.
    [Show full text]
  • Watersheds.Pdf
    Watershed Code Watershed Name 02130705 Aberdeen Proving Ground 02140205 Anacostia River 02140502 Antietam Creek 02130102 Assawoman Bay 02130703 Atkisson Reservoir 02130101 Atlantic Ocean 02130604 Back Creek 02130901 Back River 02130903 Baltimore Harbor 02130207 Big Annemessex River 02130606 Big Elk Creek 02130803 Bird River 02130902 Bodkin Creek 02130602 Bohemia River 02140104 Breton Bay 02131108 Brighton Dam 02120205 Broad Creek 02130701 Bush River 02130704 Bynum Run 02140207 Cabin John Creek 05020204 Casselman River 02140305 Catoctin Creek 02130106 Chincoteague Bay 02130607 Christina River 02050301 Conewago Creek 02140504 Conococheague Creek 02120204 Conowingo Dam Susq R 02130507 Corsica River 05020203 Deep Creek Lake 02120202 Deer Creek 02130204 Dividing Creek 02140304 Double Pipe Creek 02130501 Eastern Bay 02141002 Evitts Creek 02140511 Fifteen Mile Creek 02130307 Fishing Bay 02130609 Furnace Bay 02141004 Georges Creek 02140107 Gilbert Swamp 02130801 Gunpowder River 02130905 Gwynns Falls 02130401 Honga River 02130103 Isle of Wight Bay 02130904 Jones Falls 02130511 Kent Island Bay 02130504 Kent Narrows 02120201 L Susquehanna River 02130506 Langford Creek 02130907 Liberty Reservoir 02140506 Licking Creek 02130402 Little Choptank 02140505 Little Conococheague 02130605 Little Elk Creek 02130804 Little Gunpowder Falls 02131105 Little Patuxent River 02140509 Little Tonoloway Creek 05020202 Little Youghiogheny R 02130805 Loch Raven Reservoir 02139998 Lower Chesapeake Bay 02130505 Lower Chester River 02130403 Lower Choptank 02130601 Lower
    [Show full text]
  • Youghiogheny River Watershed Within West Virginia - 1996 Report Number 05020006-1996
    An Ecological Assessment of the Youghiogheny River Watershed within West Virginia - 1996 Report number 05020006-1996 prepared by Watershed Assessment Program Office of Water Resources West Virginia Division of Environmental Protection 1201 Greenbrier Street, Charleston, WV 25311 September 1998 Contents PAGE List of Figures and Tables.............................................. iv Summary ....................................................................... v Acknowledgements ...................................................... vii Watersheds and their Assessment ................................ 1 General Watershed Assessment Strategy ..................... 6 Special Watershed Assessment Strategy .................... 11 The Youghiogheny River Watershed ........................... 12 Assessment Methods in the Youghiogheny River Watershed................................... 20 Findings ....................................................................... 27 Benthological Sampling and Habitat Assessments 27 Bacteriological and Physico-chemical Sampling ... 31 Explanation of the Findings ........................................ .35 Implications ................................................................. 48 Additional Resources ................................................... 54 References .................................................................. 55 Appendix A - Assessment Methods and Materials & Comparing Watersheds ........................ B-1 Appendix B - Statistics & Data Tables ........................ C-1 Appendix
    [Show full text]
  • Casselman River Watershed Boating and Recreation Guide Is Unique in That It Highlights Important Features the First Time Down
    River Classifications HARNEDSVILLE TO CONFLUENCE: For the most part, this four mile segment provides a scenic view, although in Casselman River Along the Way the lower section there is a levee for flood control. Other than an easy ledge a short distance below Harnedsville, this section is an easy paddle with fast flowing Class I water. This section is typically floatable from early December River classification is a rating system that is used in determining the paddling difficulty of a waterway. There are six clas- The following descriptions are based on the Canoeing Guide to Western Pennsylvania and Northern Virginia, developed through early June. Optimal conditions are when the Markelton gauge is between two and four feet. Casselman River sifications. (Source: Canoeing Guide of Western Pennsylvania and Northern Virginia) as a community effort by the canoeists of the American Youth Hostels and other friends. Boating skills that match the Middle Youghiogheny Ramcat Access: Located near Confluence, PA downstream from the convergence of the Cas- Class I Easy: These are fast-moving waters with riffles and small waves. Few obstructions block the flow, but are obvious river classification for each segment listed are required! selman and Youghiogheny rivers, the access site is on the Yough and part of Ohiopyle State Park and is also a trail- Watershed and easily missed with little training. head for the Great Allegheny Passage. Do not miss the take-out on the left, ramcat rapid is immediately below. Casselman River Watershed CASSELMAN RIVER BRIDGE STATE PARK: Located near Grantsville, Maryland, this 0.4 acre park features the Cassel- Class II Novice: Straightforward rapids with wide, clear channels that are evident without scouting.
    [Show full text]
  • The Maryland Department of Natural Resources Conducted Limited Trout
    The Maryland Department of Natural Resources conducted limited trout stocking throughout Maryland this spring in an effort to alleviate overcrowding at state fish hatcheries, and also provide opportunity for recreational anglers. Following Gov. Larry Hogan’s executive orders to limit spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, state employees suspended all field activities, including regularly scheduled trout stocking. Without the scheduled stocking, state hatcheries lacked room needed to continue production for future seasons, and as trout in these facilities continued to grow, they were at risk of higher mortality. Removing fish and stocking them into public waters became an urgent matter. To date, the department has stocked 211,450 brown, golden, and rainbow trout across the state, at the locations listed below. Annual production at our hatcheries is about 300,000 trout. This completes trout stocking for the spring. The department encourages anglers to take advantage of the incredible fishing opportunities Maryland has to offer, provided all practice social distancing, avoid crowded areas, and minimize social interaction. Allegany County Battie Mixon: 1,500 Cotton Cove Pond: 600 Evitts Creek: 6,000 Fifteen Mile Creek: 3,700 Flintstone Creek: 1,000 Georges Creek: 500 Jennings Run: 4,500 N.B.P.R. Zero Creel: 1,900 North Jennings Run Watershed: 1,000 Rocky Gap: 4,400 Wills Creek: 5,500 Baltimore County Gunpowder Falls, Lower: 7,000 Gunpowder Falls, Upper: 3,000 Little Gunpowder Falls: 3,500 Patapsco River, Daniels: 2,000 Carroll County Farm Museum
    [Show full text]