What Offshore Wind Means for Maryland

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

What Offshore Wind Means for Maryland What Offshore Wind Means for Maryland Environmental, Economic and Public Health Benefits Across the State What Offshore Wind Means for Maryland Environmental, Economic and Public Health Benefits Across the State Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center Elizabeth Ridlington and Rob Kerth, Frontier Group Tommy Landers, Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center Spring 2012 Acknowledgments Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center thanks Jenn Aiosa of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Steve Bunker of The Nature Conservancy, Tom Carlson of the Chesa- peake Climate Action Network, and Andrew Gohn of the Maryland Energy Administra- tion for their insightful review of this document. We gratefully acknowledge the help of Tiffany Trembuell in finding photos. Thanks also to Tony Dutzik and Jordan Schneider of Frontier Group for their editorial assistance. Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center thanks the Town Creek Foundation, the Rauch Foundation, the Zanvyl and Isabelle Krieger Fund, The Fund for Change, and the Bancroft Foundation for making this report possible. The authors bear responsibility for any factual errors. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders or those who provided review. Copyright 2012 Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center is a 501(c)(3) organization. We are dedicated to protecting our air, water and open spaces. We investigate problems, craft solutions, educate the public and decision-makers, and help the public make their voices heard in local, state and national debates over the quality of our environment and our lives. For more information about Environment Maryland Research & Policy Center or for ad- ditional copies of this report, please visit www.environmentmarylandcenter.org. Frontier Group conducts independent research and policy analysis to support a cleaner, healthier and more democratic society. Our mission is to inject accurate information and compelling ideas into public policy debates at the local, state and federal levels. For more information about Frontier Group, please visit www.frontiergroup.org. Cover Photo Credit: Wind turbines off the coast of Denmark. Credit: Mara Plough- mann/istockphoto.com. Design and Layout: Harriet Eckstein Graphic Design Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 4 Offshore Wind Is a Powerful Solution to 5 Maryland’s Electricity Challenges Offshore Wind Can Benefit All Regions 8 of Maryland Eastern Shore 10 Southern Maryland 18 Central Maryland 23 Chesapeake Bay 31 Capital Region 34 Western Maryland 41 Policy Recommendations 47 Notes 48 Executive Summary aryland has abundant potential of roughly two-thirds of the power for generating electricity from consumed in the state annually, using Mwind by deploying offshore wind technology available today. farms. Investing in offshore wind would provide cleaner air and foster a more vi- • Electricity generated by wind tur- brant economy, while helping to protect bines has effectively zero emissions, healthy ecosystems for future generations making it an essential resource for of Marylanders. meeting the state’s clean energy goals Everyone in Maryland—from workers and global warming pollution reduc- in resource-based industries on the Eastern tion targets and for cleaning up our Shore to anglers in Western Maryland— air. Wind power produces no smog has something to gain from offshore wind or soot, and a single, 500-megawatt development. Capturing the vast potential (MW) wind farm could reduce global of offshore wind energy, however, will re- warming pollution by more than 1 quire the state to take action and provide million metric tons annually, equal certainty for developers of offshore wind to the pollution emitted by 196,000 farms by ensuring that the power they pro- passenger vehicles each year. duce will find buyers in the state. Offshore wind power is Maryland’s sin- Developing Maryland’s offshore wind gle largest renewable energy resource. De- resource would bring benefits to all re- veloping offshore wind generating capacity gions of the state, as soon as a wind farm is is one of the biggest steps Maryland can built and for years down the road. Below take to reduce global warming pollution. are some of the benefits that various re- Maryland cannot tackle global warming gions of Maryland may achieve from the and transition to a clean energy grid with- development of offshore wind power. out tapping into offshore wind power. • Employment could increase on • Maryland’s offshore wind power re- the Eastern Shore. Already, sources could generate the equivalent AC Wind is preparing to open a Executive Summary blade-manufacturing plant in Salis- • The entire ecosystem of the Chesa- bury that will employ 200 people. peake Bay will benefit as offshore In the longer term, the low-lying wind’s clean power helps to reduce Eastern Shore could benefit from global warming pollution, stabilizing offshore wind’s contribution to curb- water temperatures that determine ing global warming and slowing sea whether rockfish, oysters and crabs level rise. Sea level is expected to rise can survive in the bay. If emissions by more than a foot in Maryland by rise unabated, by 2100 the bay will be 2050 and potentially by 3.4 feet by as warm as the ocean off South Flori- the end of the century, which could da. With a slower emissions increase, submerge hundreds of square miles the temperature rise will be more of land. moderate, making the temperature of the bay more like the temperature of • Offshore wind, together with other the ocean off the Carolinas. measures to cut global warming pollution, can help to maintain the • Electricity from offshore wind agricultural productivity of Southern produces no solid waste that must Maryland by limiting temperature be disposed of, unlike electricity increases and changes in precipita- from coal burning. For the Capital tion patterns due to global warm- Region, this means that the West- ing. By 2050, a projected 2 to 3° F land and Brandywine coal ash dumps increase in temperature could cause could receive less toxic waste from corn and wheat yields to decline by 8 coal plants, lowering the risk of to 14 percent. A drop in agricultural groundwater contamination. Obtain- productivity could undermine the ing emissions-free electricity from economic viability of farms in the offshore wind is also one of the key region. steps Maryland must take to reduce the future severity of heavy precipita- • Investment in offshore wind facilities, tion events that can cause flooding which require large amounts of steel, across the region. could bring an economic boost to Central Maryland, adding thou- • Emissions-free offshore wind will sands of jobs if workers at Baltimore’s help to preserve the current mix of Sparrows Point steel mill and other trees that make up the forests in the area industries are employed to pro- mountains of Western Maryland. duce steel and fabricate components. Limiting temperature increases Producing electricity from wind due to global warming will help to turbines in Maryland and elsewhere maintain the maples, beeches and could help avoid the hotter and more birches that cover three-quarters of prolonged heat waves that will hit the region. In addition, clean elec- residents of urban areas in Central tricity from wind power can replace Maryland especially hard. Reducing electricity from dirty, coal-fired global warming pollution with off- power plants and will hasten the day shore wind could help avoid some of when fish caught in the region’s lakes the 90 additional heat-related deaths are free of mercury and are safe for projected in Maryland annually by human consumption. mid-century. 2 What Offshore Wind Means for Maryland Building an offshore wind farm will order to provide clear leadership and help Maryland begin to capture the en- vision regarding the important role vironmental, public health and economic of offshore wind in America’s energy benefits of reducing consumption of elec- future and to demonstrate that it is a tricity from coal-fired power plants. While high priority. a single wind farm will not solve all prob- lems of the state’s current dependence on • The U.S. Department of the Interior dirty sources of electricity, construction of should expedite siting regulations an initial wind farm will put Maryland on for offshore wind projects in federal the right path. Ultimately, tapping into the waters, while maintaining a high level full potential of the wind off Maryland’s of environmental protection. In so coasts will deliver even greater benefits. doing, they should maintain strong To encourage the development of offshore standards to make sure that offshore wind power: wind facilities do not have major impacts on wildlife, shipping chan- • The Maryland Public Service Com- nels, commercial fishing grounds or mission should solicit proposals military operations. for construction of wind-powered electricity generation off Maryland’s • The federal government should use coast and establish effective incen- its buying power to facilitate the tives to encourage offshore wind financing of offshore wind. The gov- development. ernment should negotiate long-term power purchase agreements with an • State and federal governments offshore wind developer covering should set bold goals for offshore electricity purchases for military in- wind development in the Atlantic, in stallations and other federal facilities. Executive Summary Introduction ecades ago, National Geographic de- benefits statewide—whether those benefits scribed Maryland as “America in are in the form of cleaner air, new jobs and Dminiature” for its diverse landscape.1 economic activity, or greater protection With ocean beaches, rolling farmland, a against the threat posed by global warm- large estuary, cities and towns of all sizes, ing to our precious environment and to and forested mountains—everything but our health. desert—the various regions of Maryland To reap the greatest benefit from the have evolved with distinct economic, cul- state’s offshore wind power capacity, tural and political landscapes.
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]
  • State of Maryland Action Plan For
    LARRY HOGAN Governor BOYD K. RUTHERFORD Lt. Governor KENNETH C. HOLT Secretary ELLINGTON CHURCHILL, JR. Deputy Secretary The attached document, the Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development’s “State of Maryland Action Plan for Disaster Recovery – Grant #2”, was completed and approved in May 2014, prior to the accession of the current state administration under Governor Larry Hogan and Lt. Governor Boyd K. Rutherford. This document remains in force, and has been unchanged and unedited from its original format. MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 7800 HARKINS ROAD, LANHAM, MD 20706 301-429-7400, TOLL-FREE 800-756-0119, FAX 240-334-4732 State of Maryland Action Plan for Disaster Recovery – Grant #2 Community Development Block Grant Program Submitted to HUD on March 25, 2014 Approved by HUD May 23, 2014 Martin O’Malley, Governor Anthony G. Brown, Lieutenant Governor Raymond A. Skinner, Secretary Clarence J. Snuggs, Deputy Secretary Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development 100 Community Place Crownsville, MD 21032 Email: [email protected] Phone: 410/514-7256 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary II. Introduction III. Eligible Storm Events IV. Method of Distribution V. Application Review Process VI. Funding Recommendations VII. Proposed Use of Funding VIII. Needs Assessments a. Allegany County – Hurricane Sandy b. Dorchester County – Hurricane Sandy c. Garrett County – Hurricane Sandy d. Somerset County – Hurricane Sandy e. Charles County – Tropical Storm Lee IX. Risk Analysis for Infrastructure Projects X. Grant Administration XI. Regulations, Policies and Requirements for Funded Projects XII. Certifications This plan was prepared by the Maryland Deparment of Housing and Community Development.
    [Show full text]
  • "Federation Corner" Column the Montgomery Sentinel - July 6, 2006
    "Federation Corner" column The Montgomery Sentinel - July 6, 2006 Proper maintenance of Lake Needwood long overdue by Wayne Goldstein MCCF President For several days last week, thousands of county residents were evacuated from their homes after county officials became alarmed at water seeping through Lake Needwood's dam. Although this emergency is over for now, this is the right time to look more closely at other problems at Lake Needwood. This July 20th will mark the 50th anniversary of the 1956 flooding that killed six county residents and sparked the drive to help prevent such future killing floods by building flood control dams on Rock Creek. The drive to build the dams, led by an activist citizens group known as the Rock Creek Watershed Association, also included a demand by the group to change zoning and soil conservation laws. These citizens wanted to prevent people from building in flood plains, wanted to limit additional impervious surfaces and resulting stormwater runoff, and wanted to minimize the amount of sediment washing into Upper Rock Creek, the lakes behind the dams, and the lower Rock Creek. Construction of the dams that created Lake Needwood and Lake Bernard Frank began in October 1964 and were completed within 2 years with federal funding through the PL-566 program. Lake Needwood was built to provide both flood control and recreational facilities. It is ironic that the biggest flood threat this time was the fear that the dam holding back Lake Needwood might fail. The 1988 dam inspection report states: "Overall, this is one of the best maintained PL-566 dams in state..." The first specific mention of seepage through the Lake Needwood dam was in 1993.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Amendment to the Facility Plan for the North Branch Hiker Biker Trail
    MCPB Item No. Date: 11/30/17 November 23, 2017 MEMORANDUM TO: Montgomery County Planning Board VIA: Michael F. Riley, Director Mitra Pedoeem, Deputy Director Michael Ma, Chief, Park Development Division (PDD) Patricia McManus, Design Sec on Supervisor, (PDD) FROM: Aaron Feldman, Landscape Architect (PDD), 301-650-2887 SUBJECT: Amendment to the Facility Plan for the North Branch Hiker Biker Trail STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve modifi ca ons to the 2013 Facility Plan for the North Branch Hiker-Biker Trail, specifi cally: 1) Relocate the proposed trailhead and parking lot from Muncaster Mill Road to Meadowside Lane. 2) Relocate the proposed bridge from near the Meadowside Nature Center to just south of the Intercounty Connector (ICC). PROJECT SUMMARY In March of 2017, during the detailed design phase of the project, the Norbeck Manor Homeowners Associa on contacted staff with concerns about the proposed loca on of a trailhead and parking lot intended to serve the North Branch Trail. Staff a ended a Homeowners Associa on mee ng, reviewed the concerns, studied alterna ves and presented them at a subsequent public mee ng for feedback. In light of strong community support for reloca ng the trailhead and parking lot from the loca on shown in the approved 2013 Facility Plan, staff is returning to the Planning Board for approval of the new loca on and other minor modifi ca ons to the overall plan. ExisƟ ng CondiƟ ons Located within both Rock Creek Regional Park and the North Branch Stream Valley Park, the North Branch Hiker-Biker Trail is a 2.2 mile-long segment of a con nuous regional trail system that will eventually extend from the District of Columbia northward to Olney.
    [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]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Somerset County, Maryland
    - H L 350 350 S S t t e e o o s s m r m r e e SSoommeerrsseett 350350 H L - Annemessex River landscape, Aerial photograph by Joey Gardner, 2016 Native Americans, Explorers and Settlement of Somerset n August 22, 1666, Cecil Calvert, Lord proprietor of the province of Maryland, authorized legislation creating OSomerset County, and 350 years later in this anniversary year, we look back as well as forward in celebration to honor and cherish our past as we continue to live here in the present and future. Somerset’s first inhabitants, however, were the native tribes of the lower Eastern Shore. Native American occupation of the region dates back thousands of years; its earliest inhabitants occupied a landscape far different than today with much lower sea levels. Spanning over fifteen to twenty thousand years, native American habitation matured from hunter-gathers to settled communities of tribes who resided along the region’s A characteristic Paleo-Indian fluted numerous waterways, many of which still carry their names. The Pocomoke, Manokin, projectile point from Maryland’s Eastern Annemessex, Monie and Wicomico waterways are named for these native tribes. Shore, Nancy Kurtz. Native American occupation is also represented by the thousands of artifacts that turn up in the soil, or through the written historical record as Anglo-American explorers, traders and ultimately settlers interacted with them across the peninsula. One of the earliest explorers to leave a written record of his visit, describing the local inhabitants as well as their activities was Giovanni da Verrazano, who, during the 1520s, traveled along what later became Somerset County.
    [Show full text]
  • Manokin River Chosen for Oyster Restoration Ten Sites Now Selected Under Chesapeake Bay Program Goal
    Media Release | 08-13-2019 Manokin River chosen for oyster restoration Ten sites now selected under Chesapeake Bay Program goal Annapolis, MD – The Chesapeake Bay Program is pleased to announce that the Manokin River has been selected as the tenth Chesapeake Bay tributary Media Contact: for large-scale oyster reef restoration. The Chesapeake Bay Watershed • Rachel Felver Agreement calls for the restoration of the native oyster population in 10 Director of tributaries by 2025—and the Manokin River is the final tributary to be Communications selected for this Chesapeake Bay Program partnership effort. (410) 267-5740 The Manokin River joins four other large-scale Maryland oyster restoration We Recommend: sites: Harris Creek and the Little Choptank, Tred Avon and Upper St. Mary’s • Blog rivers. Situated off Tangier Sound, along Maryland’s Eastern Shore, the • NOAA Chesapeake Bay Manokin River is over 16,000 acres and has been an oyster sanctuary area Office Oyster Fish Facts since 2010. • ChesapeakeProgress: Oysters In addition to the Maryland sites, large-scale oyster restoration is also taking • NOAA Fisheries place in five locations in Virginia: Great Wicomico, Lafayette, Lower York, highlights Chesapeake Lynnhaven and Piankatank rivers. Bay oyster restoration Facts The oyster outcome in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement seeks to continually increase finfish and shellfish habitat and water quality benefits from restored oyster populations. It also looks to restore native oyster habitat and populations in 10 tributaries by 2025 and ensure their protection. Ten Chesapeake Bay tributaries have been selected for oyster restoration: Harris Creek and Little Choptank, Manokin, Tred Avon and St.
    [Show full text]
  • Area's #1 Fishing & Hunting Outfitter
    Dear Angler: Here in Maryland, we need only look to our State Seal — depicting the fisherman and the ploughman — for proof that fishing really is part of our heritage. It’s a fun, affordable and accessible activity for all ages, and a great excuse to get our children away from video and computer games and into the great outdoors! Approximately 700,000 adults and thousands of young people fish each year in Maryland, with an estimated annual impact of $1 billion on our economy. Gov. Martin O’Malley and Sec. John R. Griffin More than a third of our anglers visit from out of state, testimony to the value and quality of our great fishing resources. We are very fortunate to have expert biologists and managers – working to- gether with our Sport Fisheries, Tidal Fisheries and Oyster Advisory Commissions, and our Coastal Fisheries Advisory Committee, to guide fisheries management across our State. We are also very fortunate to have you -- committed conserva- tionists and advocates – working with us. Your license revenues support protection and enhancement of Maryland’s fishery resources, research and management activities, expanded public access and enhanced law enforcement. And we look forward to strengthening our partnership with you as we work toward our goals for a restored Chesapeake Bay, thriving freshwater streams, and healthy abundant fish populations. Thank you for being a part of a great cultural tradition, and here’s wishing you a terrific year of fishing in Maryland. Martin O’Malley John R. Griffin Governor Secretary About the Cover: This edition of the Maryland Fishing Guide is dedicated to Frances McFaden, who retired from public service after 43 years as a steadfast, ever-helpful, and resourceful Maryland state worker.
    [Show full text]
  • F/.{Egis Ative Attorney
    AGENDA ITEM #4 November 1, 2011 Public Hearing MEMORANDUM October 28, 2011 TO: County Council 1 . FROM: Jeffirey L. Zyontz,f/.{egIs atIve Attorney SUBJECT: Public Hearing - Redistricting Commission Report Bill 31-11, Council Districts - Boundaries On October 4, the Redistricting Commission presented its report to Council, and Bill 31-11, affirming the Commission's plan, was introduced. This public hearing will be on both the Commission redistricting plan and Bill 31-11. A Council worksession is scheduled for November 8, 2011. Charter Requirements The Charter requires the 5 Council Districts to be compact, contiguous, and substantially equal in population. l Staff believes that the Commission proposed redistricts meet those standards. This conclusion should not be taken to mean that the Commission's plan is the only way to meet Charter standards. The Council can approve different district boundaries that also are compact, contiguous, and substantially equal in population. Compactness for the purpose of redistricting is a judgment that Federal Courts have left to legislatures. It is not a mathematical standard. Mathematically, the most compact district would be a perfect circle. The least compact district would be a district one block wide for its entire length. The Commission used 2010 precincts to construct their proposed districts. That decision ensured that proposed districts are never narrower than the width of a precinct at any point. 1 Charter § 103: Montgomery County shall be divided into five Council districts for the purpose of nominating and electing five members of the Council. Each district shall be compact in form and be composed of adjoining territory.
    [Show full text]
  • Citations Year to Date Printed: Thursday April 20 2017 Citations Enterd in Past 7 Days Are Highlighted Yellow
    Commonwealth of Virginia - Virginia Marine Resources Commission Lewis Gillingham, Tournament Director - Newport News, Virginia 23607 2016 Citations Year To Date Printed: Thursday April 20 2017 Citations Enterd in Past 7 Days Are Highlighted Yellow Species Caught Angler Address Release Weight Lngth Area Technique Bait 1 AMBERJACK 2016-08-10 WAYNE SEYMOUR VIRGINIA BEACH, VA Y 50.5 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 2 AMBERJACK 2016-08-10 CHAD CRUEA VIRGINIA BEACH, VA Y 52.5 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 3 AMBERJACK 2016-08-10 KEITH TREWICK VIRGINIA BEACH, VA Y 53.5 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 4 AMBERJACK 2016-08-10 DAVID BARNHART VIRGINIA BEACH, VA Y 51 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 5 AMBERJACK 2016-07-29 LOUIS HOCKER MECHANICSBURG, PA Y 54 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 6 AMBERJACK 2016-07-10 MICHAEL DELBRIDGE CHESAPEAKE, VA Y 52 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 7 AMBERJACK 2016-07-10 ROBERTSON THOMAS VIRGINIA BEACH, VA Y 51.5 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 8 AMBERJACK 2016-07-09 DAVID STEPHENS VIRGINIA BEACH, VA Y 52 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 9 AMBERJACK 2016-07-02 GABRIEL SAVA POQUOSON, VA Y 53.5 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 10 AMBERJACK 2016-07-02 CHARLES T. SOUTHALL POQUOSON, VA Y 51 SOUTHERN TOWER (NAVY BAIT FISHING LIVE BAIT (FISH) 11 BLACK DRUM 2016-11-27 WILLIAM HARRINGTON HUDGINS, VA Y 48 TRIANGLE WRECKS JIGGING LURE(UNSPECIFIED) 12 BLACK DRUM 2016-11-19 DAVID C.
    [Show full text]