Other West Chesapeake Watershed Sediment TMDL Implementation Plan February 8, 2019
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Title 26 Department of the Environment, Subtitle 08 Water
Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT Subtitle 08 WATER POLLUTION Chapters 01-10 2 26.08.01.00 Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT Subtitle 08 WATER POLLUTION Chapter 01 General Authority: Environment Article, §§9-313—9-316, 9-319, 9-320, 9-325, 9-327, and 9-328, Annotated Code of Maryland 3 26.08.01.01 .01 Definitions. A. General. (1) The following definitions describe the meaning of terms used in the water quality and water pollution control regulations of the Department of the Environment (COMAR 26.08.01—26.08.04). (2) The terms "discharge", "discharge permit", "disposal system", "effluent limitation", "industrial user", "national pollutant discharge elimination system", "person", "pollutant", "pollution", "publicly owned treatment works", and "waters of this State" are defined in the Environment Article, §§1-101, 9-101, and 9-301, Annotated Code of Maryland. The definitions for these terms are provided below as a convenience, but persons affected by the Department's water quality and water pollution control regulations should be aware that these definitions are subject to amendment by the General Assembly. B. Terms Defined. (1) "Acute toxicity" means the capacity or potential of a substance to cause the onset of deleterious effects in living organisms over a short-term exposure as determined by the Department. -
Summary of Decisions Regarding Nutrient and Sediment Load Allocations and New Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) Restoration Goals
To: Principal Staff Committee Members and Representatives of Chesapeake Bay “Headwater” States From: W. Tayloe Murphy, Jr., Chair Chesapeake Bay Program Principals’ Staff Committee Subject: Summary of Decisions Regarding Nutrient and Sediment Load Allocations and New Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) Restoration Goals For the past twenty years, the Chesapeake Bay partners have been committed to achieving and maintaining water quality conditions necessary to support living resources throughout the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. In the past month, Chesapeake Bay Program partners (Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania, the District of Columbia, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Chesapeake Bay Commission) have expanded our efforts by working with the headwater states of Delaware, West Virginia and New York to adopt new cap load allocations for nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment. Using the best scientific information available, Bay Program partners have agreed to allocations that are intended to meet the needs of the plants and animals that call the Chesapeake home. The allocations will serve as a basis for each state’s tributary strategies that, when completed by April 2004, will describe local implementation actions necessary to meet the Chesapeake 2000 nutrient and sediment loading goals by 2010. This memorandum summarizes the important, comprehensive agreements made by Bay watershed partners with regard to cap load allocations for nitrogen, phosphorus and sediments, as well as new baywide and local SAV restoration goals. Nutrient Allocations Excessive nutrients in the Chesapeake Bay and its tidal tributaries promote undesirable algal growth, and thereby, prohibit light from reaching underwater bay grasses (submerged aquatic vegetation or SAV) and depress the dissolved oxygen levels of the deeper waters of the Bay. -
Marinas of Anne Arundel County
Marina Inventory Of Anne Arundel County 2018 Office of Planning & Zoning Long Range Planning Division Marina Inventory Of Anne Arundel County July 2018 Anne Arundel County Office of Planning and Zoning Long Range Planning Division ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Office of Planning and Zoning Philip R. Hager, Planning and Zoning Officer Lynn Miller, Assistant Planning and Zoning Officer Project Team Long Range Planning Division Cindy Carrier, Planning Administrator Mark Wildonger, Senior Planner Patrick Hughes, Senior Planner Andrea Gerhard, Planner II Special Thanks to VisitAnnapolis.org for the use of the cover photo showing Herrington Harbor. Table of Contents Background Marinas Commercial Marinas Community Marinas Impacts of Marinas Direct Benefit Census Data and Economic Impact Other Waterfront Sites in the County Appendix A – Listing of Marinas in Anne Arundel County, 2018 Appendix B – Location Maps of Marinas in Anne Arundel County, 2018 Office of Planning & Zoning Long Range Planning Division Marinas of Anne Arundel County Background Anne Arundel County has approximately 533 miles of shoreline along the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. This resource provides the opportunity for the marine industry to flourish, providing services to the commercial and recreational boaters. In 1980, the first Boating and Marina Study was completed in the County. At that time, the County had 57 marinas and 1,767 boat slips.1 Since that time the County has experienced significant growth in all aspects of its economy including the marine industry. As of June 2018, there are a total of 303 marinas containing at total of 12,035 boat slips (Table 1). This report was prepared as an update to the 1997 and 2010 marina inventories2 and includes an updated inventory and mapping of marinas in the County. -
FINAL 191 F.5 Category 5 Waters
F.5 Category 5 Waters FINAL 191 Maryland's 2008 Draft Integrated Report - Category 5 Waters Cycle First Assessment Unit County Designated Use Cause Priority Notes Listed Basin Name Water Type Detail Sources TMDL In 2 Years 2002 MD-02120201 CE, HA Aquatic Life and Wildlife Combination Benthic/Fishes Low Bioassessments Lower Susquehanna River 1st thru 4th order streams Source Unknown No 2002 MD-CB1TF-02120201 CE, HA Fishing PCB in Fish Tissue High This listing only applies to the tidal Lower Susquehanna portion (02120201) of CB1TF. Tidal Lower Susquehanna Tidal subsegment Contaminated Sediments No River 1996 MD-CB1TF-02120201 CE, HA Aquatic Life and Wildlife Cadmium High This listing only applies to the tidal Lower Susquehanna (02120201) portion of CB1TF. Tidal Lower Susquehanna Tidal subsegment Source Unknown Yes River 2008 MD-02120204- CE, HA Fishing PCB in Fish Tissue High mainstem of Susquehanna River Conowingo_Pool Conowingo Dam Impoundments Contaminated Sediments No Susquehanna River 1996 MD-02120204 CE, HA Aquatic Life and Wildlife Total Suspended Solids Low (TSS) Conowingo Dam Non-tidal 8-digit watershed Source Unknown No Susquehanna River 1996 MD-02120204 CE, HA Aquatic Life and Wildlife Phosphorus (Total) Low Conowingo Dam Non-tidal 8-digit watershed Source Unknown No Susquehanna River 1996 MD-02130102-T- WO Aquatic Life and Wildlife Phosphorus (Total) High ASSAWOMAN_BAY Assawoman Bay Coastal Bay Agriculture Yes 25-Jul-08 FINALCategory 5 Waters FINAL Page 1 of 57 Cycle First Assessment Unit County Designated Use Cause Priority -
To Download the Case for Open Space
THE CASE FOR OPEN SPACE Program Open Space TABLE OF CONTENTS STATESIDE 1 What is Program Open Space 2 Department of Natural Resources creates state and local parks, Land Acquisition 4 Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation 6 Rural Legacy preserves agricultural lands, 8 Maryland Environmental Trust 10 Map - Greenprint and provides playgrounds, LOCALSIDE 12 Allegany County 13 Anne Arundel County ball fields, and other 14 Baltimore City 15 Baltimore County 16 Calvert County recreational opportunities 17 Charles County 18 Frederick County 19 Garrett County for Marylanders. 20 Howard County 21 Montgomery County 22 Prince George’s County 23 Somerset County 24 St. Mary’s County 25 Wicomico County 26 Worcester County RESOURCES 28 Questions and Glossary 29 The Case for Open Space PARTNERS FOR OPEN SPACE Partners for Open Space is a statewide coalition of over 165 groups seeking to secure, save and protect Maryland’s land conservation programs. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Bill Crouch Ann Jones Kelly Carneal The Conservation Fund Baltimore County Land Trust Executive Director Alliance Paul Dial Jim Baird Maryland Recreation and Parks Dru Schmidt-Perkins American Farmland Trust Association 1000 Friends of Maryland Steve Bunker Tom Donlin Karla Raettig The Nature Conservancy Maryland Recreation and Parks Maryland League of Conserva- John Byrd Association tion Voters MACo Recreation and Parks Joel Dunn Kent Whitehead Affiliate Chesapeake Conservancy The Trust for Public Land Kim Coble Janna Howley Chesapeake Bay Foundation University of Maryland Extension We would like to thank both the Rauch Foundation and The Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. Without their generous support, this report would not be possible. -
2000 Data Report Gunpowder River, Patapsco/Back River West Chesapeake Bay and Patuxent River Watersheds
2000 Data Report Gunpowder River, Patapsco/Back River West Chesapeake Bay and Pat uxent River Watersheds Gunpowder River Basin Patapsco /Back River Basin Patuxent River Basin West Chesapeake Bay Basin TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 3 GUNPOWDER RIVER SUB-BASIN ............................................................................. 9 GUNPOWDER RIVER....................................................................................................... 10 LOWER BIG GUNPOWDER FALLS ................................................................................... 16 BIRD RIVER.................................................................................................................... 22 LITTLE GUNPOWDER FALLS ........................................................................................... 28 MIDDLE RIVER – BROWNS............................................................................................. 34 PATAPSCO RIVER SUB-BASIN................................................................................. 41 BACK RIVER .................................................................................................................. 43 BODKIN CREEK .............................................................................................................. 49 JONES FALLS .................................................................................................................. 55 GWYNNS FALLS ............................................................................................................ -
Anne Arundel County Department of Public Works Bureau of Engineering Watershed, Ecosystem, and Restoration Services
ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS BUREAU OF ENGINEERING WATERSHED, ECOSYSTEM, AND RESTORATION SERVICES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM To: Rich Eskin, MDE, Director of Science Services From: Hala Flores, P.E., DPW, WERS Program Manager Through: Ginger Ellis, DPW, WERS Planning Administrator Copy: Ronald Bowen, P.E., Director Janis Markusic, WERS Program Manager Date: 5/7/2010 Re: Methods and procedures for developing the Anne Arundel County Baseline Pollutant Loads by Sector Anne Arundel County presented a preliminary draft tabulation of the County’s Baseline Pollutant loads by jurisdictional sectors at the April 27, 2010 Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) meeting. Subsequently and as requested at the meeting, this memorandum offers a brief documentation of the methods and procedures utilized in the development of these loads. It is understood that this draft documentation is in active development and reflects the current available data, assumptions, coefficients, and other parameters within the model. It is noted that this documentation accounts for comments and requests made in the April 27th meeting and will be updated to reflect future comments and WIP committee consensus. To conserve efforts and cost, a new model run will not be conducted until this documentation is reviewed, all data are received, and consensus is reached to rerun the model. Water Quality Modeling (Overview of Methods) The model used by Anne Arundel County Government to estimate the pollutant load is based on the PLOAD- EPA Simple Method, which is integrated into the EPA BASINS program. The model utilizes Arcview analysis and Excel spreadsheet calculations to estimate the edge-of-field pollutant loads from various landcovers and their associated loading rates. -
NOAA Chart 12270
BookletChart™ Chesapeake Bay – Eastern Bay and South River NOAA Chart 12270 A reduced-scale NOAA nautical chart for small boaters When possible, use the full-size NOAA chart for navigation. Published by the Herrington Harbour (see also chart 12266), 0.6 mile westward of Holland Point, is entered through a jettied private channel from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration south side of Herring Bay. The channel is marked by a 199° lighted range National Ocean Service and other private aids. In 2008, the channel had a reported controlling Office of Coast Survey depth of 7 feet. The channel is very narrow and must be followed closely to carry the best water. A small-craft facility is on the east side of the www.NauticalCharts.NOAA.gov harbor just inside the entrance. Gasoline, diesel fuel, water, berths with 888-990-NOAA electricity, and repairs are available. Rockhold Creek, at the northwest corner of Herring Bay, has good What are Nautical Charts? shelter for small boats. A marked dredged channel leads from the bay to a turning basin just below the fixed highway bridge at Deale. In 2010, Nautical charts are a fundamental tool of marine navigation. They show the controlling depth was 6.3 feet (7 feet at midchannel) to the head of water depths, obstructions, buoys, other aids to navigation, and much the project. Depths are 2.1 to 3.0 feet for about 0.4 mile above the more. The information is shown in a way that promotes safe and bridge. A light marks the outer end of the breakwater on the north side efficient navigation. -
Whigham 2014 Summit
A landscape-scale approach to management of a major invasive species, Phragmites australis, in Chesapeake Bay tidal wetlands Dennis Whigham1, Eric Hazelton1,2, Melissa McCormick1, and Karin Kettenring1,2 1Smithsonian Environmental Research Center 2Utah State University Saltonstall. 2002. PNAS 99: 2445-2449 Rhode River 1970 Rhode River 2009 A fundamental question in ecology What drives the (rapid) spread of invasive species? Characteristics Characteristics of environment of invader Subestuaries of Chesapeake Bay studied as part of EPA-funded Atlantic Slope Consortium project Jones Falls Back Gwynns Falls Bird Patapsco Langford Curtis Southeast Magothy Corsica Severn South Wye Rhode Miles Tred Avon Battle King, R.S., W.V. Deluca, D.F. Whigham, Wicomico St. Clements St. Leonards and P.P. Marra. 2007. Threshold effects of Mill C coastal urbanization on Phragmites Breton h Manokin St. Mary's e australis (Common Reed) abundance and s Nomini a foliar nitrogen in Chesapeake Bay. p e Totuskey a Estuaries and Coasts 30: 469-481. k e Piankatank B a y Ware LANDUSE Agricultural Developed Warwick Forested Pagan Mixed-Ag Mixed-Dev Elizabeth . Kilometers 0 12.5 25 50 75 100 Have environmental factors driven the spread of Phragmites in recent years? Phragmites seedling emergence higher in disturbances (p<0.001) in some plant communities (p<0.001). Rhizome emergence was low and not related to disturbances control 40 aboveground disturbance belowground disturbance b b b b 30 b ab 20 (mean ± 1 SE)±1 (mean a a % seedling emergence seedling % 10 a a a a 0 -
Page 1 of 11
Easygrants ID: 24382 National Fish and Wildlife Foundation NFWF/Legacy Grant Project ID: 0603.10.024382 Chesapeake Bay Small Watershed Grants 2010 - Submit Final Programmatic Report (Activities) Grantee Organization: Scenic Rivers Land Trust, Inc. Project Title: South River Greenway II (MD) Project Period 09/01/2010 - 03/31/2012 Award Amount $65,858.30 Matching Contributions $317,692.00 Project Location Description (from Proposal) The South River Greenway (39 01 00 76 38 00) is near Annapolis. The West/Rhode River (38 51 00 76 31 00) is centered around Galesville and Shady Side. This area is part of Severn HUC 02060004. Project Summary (from Proposal) Permanently protect 750 acres of land in the South River watershed as part of the ongoing South River Greenway Initiative. The project will engage 350 volunteers in conservation activities, complete nine habitat restoration projects, investigate the conservation potential of 20 target properties, and begin a similar land preservation effort in the West/Rhode River watershed. Summary of Accomplishments This growing and continuing project has permanently preserved over 1,200 high-priority acres in the South River Greenway through purchase or easement. With support from this grant we added 642 acres and we have an additional 400 acres at some point in the negotiation process. Public understanding and appreciation for our targeted large-landscape approach to land protection has increased. We have exceeded our matching funds and public outreach goals. Staff participated in 56 outreach events, reaching over 3,300 residents. Launching a new effort in the West/Rhode River watershed has yet to yield completed easements, but our work in that community has led to easements on two incredible properties, totaling 150 acres, in the adjacent Patuxent River watershed. -
Interannual Variation in Gelatinous Zooplankton and Their Prey in the Rhode River, Maryland…………………
LANDSCAPE PATTERNS, NUTRIENT DISCHARGES AND BIOTA OF THE RHODE RIVER ESTUARY AND ITS WATERSHED: CONTRIBUTION OF THE SMITHSONIAN ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER TO THE PILOT INTEGRATED ECOSYSTEM ASSESSMENT Denise Breitburg Anson Hines Thomas Jordan Melissa McCormick Donald Weller Dennis Whigham Smithsonian Environmental Research Center PO Box 28 Edgewater, MD 21037 Final Report for subcontract from Versar, Inc. Subcontract No.006481 - “Planning, facilitation, data collection, analysis, and synthesis for CBIEA pilot FY2008 – Rhode- West Sub-estuary”. H. Ward Slacum Jr. NOAA Project Manager TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page Executive summary……………………………………………………………..….…..3 I. Land use trends in the Rhode River watershed ……………………….…….…7 II. Atmospheric deposition, watershed discharges, and long-term variability of nutrients, suspended solids, and chlorophyll in the Rhode River………………………………………..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..……...16 III. Timing, extent, and mechanisms of Phragmites australis spread in the Rhode River Subestuary……..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..…..……..…..32 IV. Interannual variation in gelatinous zooplankton and their prey in the Rhode River, Maryland………………….. ….…..…..…..…..………..………46 V. Female Blue Crab Migration in Chesapeake Bay…..…..…..…...…..…...….…60 VI. Living Resources of the Rhode River Subestuary……..…..……..…..….……72 . 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is submitted by the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center as its contribution to the collaborative effort led by the NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office to conduct a Mid-Atlantic Pilot Integrated Ecosystem Assessment. NOAA funding, subcontracted through Versar, supported analysis or report preparation of data presented, and in the case of the Pragmites study, collection of primary data. Authors of the various chapters are listed and can be contacted for additional details. We summarize the studies below. An understanding of land use and watershed characteristics is important to management of nutrient discharges, and ultimately to restoration of water quality in Chesapeake Bay and its subestuaries. -
Water Quality Database Design and Data Dictionary
Water Quality Database Database Design and Data Dictionary Prepared For: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III Chesapeake Bay Program Office January 2004 BACKGROUND...........................................................................................................................................4 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................6 WATER QUALITY DATA.............................................................................................................................6 THE RELATIONAL CONCEPT ..................................................................................................................6 THE RELATIONAL DATABASE STRUCTURE ...................................................................................7 WATER QUALITY DATABASE STRUCTURE..........................................................8 PRIMARY TABLES ..........................................................................................................................................8 WQ_CRUISES ..................................................................................................................................................8 WQ_EVENT.......................................................................................................................................................8 WQ_DATA..........................................................................................................................................................9