DOCSLIB.ORG

Performance Report – 2002

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Performance Report – 2002 ANNUAL (2005) AND FINAL (2001-2005) PERFORMANCE REPORT SURVEY AND MANAGEMENT OF MARYLAND’S FISHERY RESOURCES Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Service Inland Fisheries Management Program Tawes State Office Building B-2 580 Taylor Avenue Annapolis, Maryland 21401 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Federal Aid Grant: F-48-R-15 This grant was supported by funds from the Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Acts (Dingell-Johnson & Wallop-Breaux) and the State of Maryland Fisheries Management and Protection Fund TABLE OF CONTENTS Fisheries Information Resources........................................................A1 Environmental Review Angler Preference Survey Supplementary Information Impoundment Fisheries......................................................................B1 Survey and Inventory Administer Rodeo Pond Program Monitor Trends in Fish Populations Coldwater Streams.............................................................................C1 Summary of Trout Population Statistics Survey and Inventory of Fish Species and Habitat Major Rivers and Streams..................................................................D1 Monitor Trends in Fish Population Dynamics Tidal Freshwater Streams ..................................................................E1 Adult Population Assessment Juvenile Recruitment Surveys Hatchery Contribution Tagging Studies Scale/Otolith Comparison Studies Angler Creel Surveys Tournament Surveys ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2005 Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Service Inland Fisheries Management Program SURVEY AND MANAGEMENT OF FRESHWATER FISHERIES RESOURCES Management of Fisheries Information Resources USFWS Federal Aid Grant F-48-R-15 Study I By: Susan Rivers A1 Table of Contents Fisheries Information Resources Environmental Review......................................................................................................A3 Angler Preference Survey.................................................................................................A7 Supplementary Information: (not charged to project) Formulation & Evaluation of Conservation Regulations...........................................A24 A2 State: Maryland Project Number: F-48-R-15 Study No.: I Job No.: 1 Project Title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources Study Title: Management of Fisheries Information Resources Job Title: Environmental Review Introduction The objective of this job was to conduct environmental reviews of any projects that might impact fish populations and their habitat. Methods The Environmental Review Section within the Department of Natural Resources or another lead agency for the given project contacted the Inland Fisheries Division of Maryland Fisheries Service to gain input and advice from staff. The local resource manager reviewed the project, checked historical data on the area in question, and conducted site visits to determine potential impacts on fish populations. All information collected during this procedure was evaluated and used to develop a position statement. In cases where no relevant data was available, a literature search of similar types of projects was conducted to aid in the development of a best course of action. For some projects, action included on-site sampling of the fish populations and existing habitat to gain additional information. If it was determined that impact from the proposed activity could not be avoided, mitigation alternatives were developed. Projects subject to environmental review by the staff of Fisheries Service include: wetlands alteration, bridge and roadway planning and construction, forestry practices, acid mine mitigation, property acquisition, comprehensive plans, water allocation, and mining projects, research projects by other entities, and proposed discharge sources. Results and Discussion Major environmental review activities involved new and continuing projects in 2005. The continuing activities involved the review of forestry practices, strip mining, water allocation, waterway habitat issues and mitigation activities. Environmental review continued on the proposed Inter-County Connector (ICC) roadway for Montgomery County as government officials have increased interest in the project. The proposed path of the roadway will be constructed over the headwaters of Paint Branch, in the Good Hope Tributary where naturally reproducing brown trout spawning has been documented. A3 Problems developed in the spring and early summer of 2005 on the Youghiogheny River as a result of warm thermal discharges from Deep Creek Lake in Garrett County. Staff learned that the management company for the Deep Creek Lake Hydro-electric Plant had changed and that the new managers were not aware of past agreements. Western Region staff negotiated with the new managers to insure that the negotiated thermal flow and discharge regimes from the lake to the river would be followed in the future. Strip mining remediation activities continued to be an issue in Western Maryland. Staff gathered information on streams where proposed liming projects were scheduled and monitored existing sites. One site on George’s Creek in Allegany County experienced a catastrophic event when acid levels increased in the stream causing a total fish kill. Experts believe that an underground cell collapsed and flushed additional acidic water into the area and exceeded the capacity of the existing lime dosing unit. Staff is working with the Bureau of Mines and the Department of the Environment in an attempt to rectify the situation, but this will be an on-going project to gain back the resources in George’s Creek. Land acquisition activities continued in Western Maryland to provide increased and safer access to fishing areas in Garrett and Allegany Counties. Most of these access opportunities are being pursued on the North Branch of the Potomac River. A new environmental review activity was the review of collection permits for research proposals. Most of the collection permit proposals involved studies of pelecypod (mussels) or decapod (crayfish) species and accumulated contaminants. Staff reviewed the areas and activities proposed with each study to ensure that they would not interfere with on-going studies and that they would not adversely impact rare, threatened or endangered species of mussels and crayfish. The information on environmental reviews for 2005 for Inland Fisheries is contained in Table 1. Environmental review activities for the past five years have shown an increase in projects and impacts resulting from increased development (Table 2). Increases were observed in water allocation, road and bridge projects and wetland alteration. With the review of these projects also came the review of projects intended to mitigate the impacts of these activities. Stream restoration and fish passage activities are examples of mitigation processes dealing with population growth and development. An internal reorganization in Fisheries Service resulted in more permit reviews for academic collection and aquaculture. Since these activities can impact both managed species and rare threatened and endangered species, it is important to evaluate the impact of proposals on the fishery resources of the State. A4 Conclusions The following conclusions apply to the past year, the concluding 5-year study and future needs for environmental review. • Environmental reviews must continue to protect the inland fishery resources of the State. • Staff must continue to pursue existing projects on the North Branch of the Potomac River, Youghiogheny River and Deep Creek Lake, Gunpowder Falls, George’s Creek, and Paint Branch. • Work with strip-mined areas in Western Maryland needs to continue to rehabilitate extirpated or threatened fish populations. • Staff needs to respond to new projects in a timely manner to protect fish populations. • Development in Maryland is increasing and staff will need to be prepared to respond to more environmental review projects that deal with urban expansion. • As more research groups work with species and environmental conditions, Inland Fisheries staff will be reviewing more collection permits and will need to closely monitor those studies that may conflict with Inland Fisheries studies. Table 1. Environmental review activities for Inland Fisheries Division of Maryland Fisheries Service during 2005. Management section Environmental Review Western Central Southern Eastern Planning Nontidal wetlands alteration 1 17 1 Tidal water/wetlands alteration 1 Comprehensive plans 4 Strip mining 5 Strip mining mitigation 3 Timber sales 9 Reservoirs/water allocation 7 8 Land acquisition 1 Bridge projects 4 6 Road projects 4 6 Stream restoration 7 5 Aquaculture permit 4 Collection permit 5 6 7 Sewage treatment plant permit 2 review Fish passage 10 Wastewater treatment plant 5 modification Utility impacts / dredging 5 A5 Table 2. Environmental review activities conducted by Maryland Inland Fisheries Division, 2001-2005. Environmental Review 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Nontidal wetlands alteration 52 35 13 19 19 Tidal water/wetlands alteration 4 1 1 Comprehensive plans 16 6 5 6 4 Strip mining 4 3 6 4 5 Strip mining mitigation 10 5 2 15 3 Timber sales 7 9 8 11 9 Reservoirs/water allocation 2 7 13 14 15 Land acquisition 6 4 6 5 1 Bridge projects 1 4 10 10 Road projects 14 8 10 Stream restoration 1 12 Aquaculture permit 4 Collection permit 18 Sewage treatment plant permit 2 review Gravel pit mining 1 1 Fish passage 10 Wastewater treatment plant 5 modification Utility impacts/dredging
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Appendix M: Aquatic Biota Monitoring Table
    NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT APPENDIX M: AQUATIC BIOTA MONITORING TABLE Final – May 2020 Aquatic Habitat, BIBI, and FIBI Scores and Rankings for Monitoring Sites within the Vicinity of the I-495 & I-270 Managed Lanes Study Corridor Aquatic Habitat BIBI FIBI MDE 12-digit Watershed Site Waterway Source Site I.D. Year Narrative Narrative Narrative Name Coordinates Method Score Score Score Ranking Ranking Ranking Fairfax County Middle 38.959552, Potomac Watersheds1 Dead Run FCDPWES -77.176163 1646305 2008 -- -- -- 19.1 Very Poor -- -- Fairfax County Middle 38.959552, Potomac Watersheds1 Dead Run FCDPWES -77.176163 1646305 2009 -- -- -- 15.5 Very Poor -- -- Fairfax County Middle 38.959552, Potomac Watersheds1 Dead Run FCDPWES -77.176163 1646305 2010 -- -- -- 30.5 Poor -- -- Fairfax County Middle 38.959552, Potomac Watersheds1 Dead Run FCDPWES -77.176163 1646305 2011 -- -- -- 29.7 Poor -- -- Fairfax County Middle 38.959552, Potomac Watersheds1 Dead Run FCDPWES -77.176163 1646305 2012 -- -- -- 13.3 Very Poor -- -- Fairfax County Middle 38.959552, Potomac Watersheds1 Dead Run FCDPWES -77.176163 1646305 2013 -- -- -- 12.5 Very Poor -- -- Fairfax County Middle 38.959552, Potomac Watersheds1 Dead Run FCDPWES -77.176163 1646305 2014 -- -- -- 38 Poor -- -- Fairfax County Middle 38.959552, Potomac Watersheds1 Dead Run FCDPWES -77.176163 1646305 2015 -- -- -- 27.7 Poor -- -- Fairfax County Middle 38.959552, Potomac Watersheds1 Dead Run FCDPWES -77.176163 1646305 2016 -- -- -- 27.4 Poor -- -- Fairfax County Middle 38.959552, Potomac Watersheds1
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • News Release Address: Email and Homepage: U.S
    News Release Address: Email and Homepage: U.S. Department of the Interior Maryland-Delaware-D.C. District [email protected] U.S. Geological Survey 8987 Yellow Brick Road http://md.water.usgs.gov/ Baltimore, MD 21237 Release: Contact: Phone: Fax: January 4, 2002 Wendy S. McPherson (410) 238-4255 (410) 238-4210 Below Normal Rainfall and Warm Temperatures Lead to Record Low Water Levels in December Three months of above normal temperatures and four months of below normal rainfall have led to record low monthly streamflow and ground-water levels, according to hydrologists at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in Baltimore, Maryland. Streamflow was below normal at 94 percent of the real-time USGS gaging stations and 83 percent of the USGS observation wells across Maryland and Delaware in December. Record low streamflow levels for December were set at Winters Run and Pocomoke River. Streamflow levels at Deer Creek and Winters Run in Harford County have frequently set new record daily lows for the last four months (see real-time graphs at http://md.water.usgs.gov/realtime/). Streamflow was also significantly below normal at Antietam Creek, Choptank River, Conococheague Creek, Nassawango Creek, Patapsco River, Gunpowder River, Patuxent River, Piscataway Creek, Monocacy River, and Potomac River in Maryland, and Christina River, St. Jones River, and White Clay Creek in Delaware. The monthly streamflow in the Potomac River near Washington, D.C. was 82 percent below normal in December and 54 percent below normal for 2001. Streamflow entering the Chesapeake Bay averaged 23.7 bgd (billion gallons per day), which is 54 percent below the long-term average for December.
    [Show full text]
  • Mile Creek Area Limited Amendment Clarksburg Master Plan and Hyattstown Special Study Area
    Approved and Adopted July 2014 10Mile Creek Area Limited Amendment Clarksburg Master Plan and Hyattstown Special Study Area Montgomery County Planning Department M-NCPPC MongomeryPlanning.org APPROVED and ADOPTED 10 Mile Creek Area Limited Amendment Clarksburg Master Plan ans Hyattstown Special Study Area Abstract This document is a Limited Amendment to the 1994 Clarksburg Master Plan and Hyattstown Special Study Area for the Ten Mile Creek Watershed. It retains the 1994 Master Plan vision, but refines 1994 Plan recommendations to better achieve two important objectives: the creation of a well-defined corridor town that provides jobs, homes, and commercial activities; and the preservation of natural resources critical to the County’s well-being. The Amendment contains land use, zoning, transportation, parks, and historic resources recommendations for the portions of the Planning Area in the Ten Mile Creek Watershed. Source of Copies The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission 8787 Georgia Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20910 Online: www.MontgomeryPlanning.org/community/plan_areas/I270_corridor/clarksburg/ clarksburg_lim_amendment.shtm Notice to Readers An area master plan, after approval by the District Council and adoption by the Maryland- National Capital Park and Planning Commission, constitutes an amendment to The General Pl (On Wedges and Corridors) for Montgomery County. Each area master plan reflects a vision of future development that responds to the unique character of the local community within the context of a Countywide perspective. Area master plans are intended to convey land use policy for defined geographic areas and should be interpreted together with relevant Countywide functional master plans. Master plans generally look ahead about 20 years from the date of adoption.
    [Show full text]
  • Marilandica, Summer/Fall 2002
    MARILANDICA Journal of the Maryland Native Plant Society Vol. 10, No. 2 Summer/Fall 2002 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Marilandica Journal of the Maryland Native Plant Society The Maryland Native Volume 10, Number 2 Summer/Fall 2002 Plant Society ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (MNPS) is a nonprofit organization that uses education, research, and Table of Contents community service to increase the awareness and appreciation of Native Woody Flora of Montgomery County native plants and their habitats, By John Mills Parrish leading to their conservation and Page 3 restoration. Membership is open to ~ all who are interested in Maryland’s MNPS Field Botany Updates native plants and their habitats, preserving Maryland’s natural By Rod Simmons, Cris Fleming, John Parrish, and Jake Hughes heritage, increasing their knowledge Page 8 of native plants, and helping to ~ further the Society’s mission. In Search of Another Orchid Species By Joseph F. Metzger, Jr. MNPS sponsors monthly meetings, Page 11 workshops, field trips, and an ~ annual fall conference. Just Boil the Seeds By James MacDonald Page 13 Maryland Native Plant Society ~ P.O. Box 4877 MNPS Contacts Silver Spring, MD 20914 www.mdflora.org Page 15 ~ Some Varieties of Andropogon virginicus and MNPS Executive Officers: Andropogon scoparius By M.L. Fernald, Rhodora, Vol. 37, 1935 Karyn Molines-President Page 16 Louis Aronica-Vice President Marc Imlay-Vice President Roderick Simmons-Vice President Jane Osburn-Secretary Jean Cantwell-Treasurer MNPS Board Of Directors: Carole Bergmann Blaine Eckberg Cris Fleming Jake Hughes Carol Jelich Dwight Johnson James MacDonald Joe Metzger, Jr. Lespedeza repens John Parrish Mary Pat Rowan Submissions for Marilandica are welcomed. Word documents are preferred but Louisa Thompson not necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • Gunpowder River
    Table of Contents 1. Polluted Runoff in Baltimore County 2. Map of Baltimore County – Percentage of Hard Surfaces 3. Baltimore County 2014 Polluted Runoff Projects 4. Fact Sheet – Baltimore County has a Problem 5. Sources of Pollution in Baltimore County – Back River 6. Sources of Pollution in Baltimore County – Gunpowder River 7. Sources of Pollution in Baltimore County – Middle River 8. Sources of Pollution in Baltimore County – Patapsco River 9. FAQs – Polluted Runoff and Fees POLLUTED RUNOFF IN BALTIMORE COUNTY Baltimore County contains the headwaters for many of the streams and tributaries feeding into the Patapsco River, one of the major rivers of the Chesapeake Bay. These tributaries include Bodkin Creek, Jones Falls, Gwynns Falls, Patapsco River Lower North Branch, Liberty Reservoir and South Branch Patapsco. Baltimore County is also home to the Gunpowder River, Middle River, and the Back River. Unfortunately, all of these streams and rivers are polluted by nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment and are considered “impaired” by the Maryland Department of the Environment, meaning the water quality is too low to support the water’s intended use. One major contributor to that pollution and impairment is polluted runoff. Polluted runoff contaminates our local rivers and streams and threatens local drinking water. Water running off of roofs, driveways, lawns and parking lots picks up trash, motor oil, grease, excess lawn fertilizers, pesticides, dog waste and other pollutants and washes them into the streams and rivers flowing through our communities. This pollution causes a multitude of problems, including toxic algae blooms, harmful bacteria, extensive dead zones, reduced dissolved oxygen, and unsightly trash clusters.
    [Show full text]
  • Lllli[Llllllll ": Ii/I Llll[Lllll
    MARYLAND BIRDLIFE , ! lllli[llllllll ": Ii/Illll[lllll h\A Y LAYJ ,_? P) Volume VI November - December 1950 Number 5 C 0 N T E N T S , , ,, THE SEASON , September - October , 1950 . ..... 56 Chandler S. Robblns Patapsco Valley Field Trip, May V . " " 68 Ruth E. Lenderking Baltimore Field Trips, First Half of 1960 . 69 Orville Crowder MARYLAND BIRDLIFE STAFF Editor Chandler S. Robbins, Patuxent Refuge, Laurel, Md. Art Editor ,, L , Irving E. Hampe, 5559 Ashbourne Rd., Baltimore 27, Md. Associate Editors Miss A~ele Malcolm, 204 Washington St., Cumberland, Md. Mrs. R. B. Green, 1016 Hamilton Blvd., Hagerstown, Md. Rodgers Tull Smith, i01 E. Church St., Frederick, ~id. Mrs. Wm~ A. McComas, 822 Rock Spring Rd., Bel Air, Md. Events 6f November-Decemberar~ MARYLA~ BIRDLIFE reported in the Jan.-Feb. issue, published bi-monthly except for whichclosing date is Jan. I July-August by and publication date Feb. 1. Send field notes and Other material MARYLAND 0ENITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY to your local staff member, or di- 2101 Bolton Street rect to Editor Chandler S. Robblns, Baltimore 17, MarYland Patuxent Research Refuge, Laurel,M~ -54 -...... Voi. VI~ No. 5 ' '_ ~IARYLAh~DBIRDLIFE, ,. __. ~ .... ....... , _ . Nov.-Dec.. 1950, ~..,,,,.:,~.~ ~ ~ ~:~ ~<...~ ~%~ .... :,-,~.~.,, ~-.'T~ / I ! _ "Q'~\~.': I , . ~, '.-~;C~'~ .. ..... :.,:..~:~ ;,:~ ,~:.':~ ~~.~.. .--,~,,.~.,,-~-.~:...:,.:~.. ~.':~,,*,.~ . -,,,.~.~,~,,. ...~ ~,~,. ~ ^..':~,:.-- .~..~ ~'~..~.~ ...,~:,,..~.. ., L~'~:;L. ' ,..-~,~-'~ ~............. ~"~;.,~,, ~--i~,,~ --..:. ~ ~ -.-~ , ~. -.~ . , ,'~ ..... .~ "'~ September and October 1950 Temperatures in September averaged about one degree below normal, but the deficit was due more to cool days than to cold nights. Minimum temperatures were close to the seasonal average except for brief spells from Sept. 5 to 7 and Sept. 24 to 27. The principal migration waves occurred during these cold snaps and to a lesser extent from Sept.
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland's 2016 Triennial Review of Water Quality Standards
    Maryland’s 2016 Triennial Review of Water Quality Standards EPA Approval Date: July 11, 2018 Table of Contents Overview of the 2016 Triennial Review of Water Quality Standards ............................................ 3 Nationally Recommended Water Quality Criteria Considered with Maryland’s 2016 Triennial Review ............................................................................................................................................ 4 Re-evaluation of Maryland’s Restoration Variances ...................................................................... 5 Other Future Water Quality Standards Work ................................................................................. 6 Water Quality Standards Amendments ........................................................................................... 8 Designated Uses ........................................................................................................................... 8 Criteria ....................................................................................................................................... 19 Antidegradation.......................................................................................................................... 24 2 Overview of the 2016 Triennial Review of Water Quality Standards The Clean Water Act (CWA) requires that States review their water quality standards every three years (Triennial Review) and revise the standards as necessary. A water quality standard consists of three separate but related
    [Show full text]
  • The Overlook an Independent Newsletter by and for the Residents of Snowden Overlook
    VOLUME 12 ISSUE 4 OCTOBER 2020 THE OVERLOOK AN INDEPENDENT NEWSLETTER BY AND FOR THE RESIDENTS OF SNOWDEN OVERLOOK Chillin’. With limited options for in- TABLE OF CONTENTS: person gatherings, SOCA arranged SOCA News …………………. 2 EDITORIAL for visits from several food trucks, Condo News…………………. 3 all vetted with health and safety in Clubs & Committees.................6 No question about it, the COVID19 mind and maintaining appropriate For Your Health …………...……8 pandemic has resulted in immense social distancing. To the delight of Book Nook...............................9 suffering, staggering loss of life, devoted users of the pool, it finally Travel ……………………..….11 created great hardship for many opened - only a few weeks later Meet Your Neighbors..............13 people and exposed deep fissures than planned - and remained open Miscellany..............................16 in many communities throughout the until October 4, giving swimmers an Public Service ……….………17 United States. Although the statis- extra week! Tech Tips …………………….18 tics show that our zipcode 21045 Rich’s Corner..........................19 has reported the most COVID19 Take a few minutes to test your fa- infections in Howard County, adher- miliarity with the ‘movers and shak- ing to state and county health di- ers’ in the community by matching rectives as well as to measures the photos on page 20 with their adopted by the Snowden Overlook names! NEXT ISSUE Board of Directors has enabled the community to remain virus-free. Wishing you a colorful fall and an January 15, 2021 early Happy New Year, DEADLINE FOR As has become routine, reports SUBMISSIONS from SOCA and the condo associa- — Pamela Bluh Van Oosten tions are included in this issue of The Christy Wilson January 8, 2021 Overlook, as well as a few commit- Editors tee reports.
    [Show full text]
  • Deer and Turkey Tagging & Checking
    DEER AND TURKEY TAGGING & CHECKING Garrett Allegany CWDMA Washington Frederick Carroll Baltimore Harford Lineboro Maryland Line Cardiff Finzel 47 Ellerlise Pen Mar Norrisville 24 Whiteford ysers 669 40 Ringgold Harney Freeland 165 Asher Youghiogheny 40 Ke 40 ALT Piney Groev ALT 68 615 81 11 Emmitsburg 86 ge Grantsville Barrellville 220 Creek Fairview 494 Cearfoss 136 136 Glade River aLke Rid 546 Mt. avSage Flintstone 40 Cascade Sabillasville 624 Prospect 68 ALT 36 itts 231 40 Hancock 57 418 Melrose 439 Harkins Corriganville v Harvey 144 194 Eklo Pylesville 623 E Aleias Bentley Selbysport 40 36 tone Maugansville 550 419410 Silver Run 45 68 Pratt 68 Mills 60 Leitersburg Deep Run Middletown Springs 23 42 68 64 270 496 Millers Shane 646 Zilhman 40 251 Fountain Head Lantz Drybranch 543 230 ALT Exline P 58 62 Prettyboy Friendsville 638 40 o 70 St. aulsP Union Mills Bachman Street t Clear 63 491 Manchester Dublin 40 o Church mithsburg Taneytown Mills Resevoir 1 Aviltn o Eckhart Mines Cumberland Rush m Spring W ilson S Motters 310 165 210 LaVale a Indian 15 97 Rayville 83 440 Frostburg Glarysville 233 c HagerstownChewsville 30 er Springs Cavetown n R 40 70 Huyett Parkton Shawsville Federal r Cre Ady Darlingto iv 219 New Little 250 iv Cedar 76 140 Dee ek R Ridgeley Twiggtown e 68 64 311 Hill Germany 40 Orleans r Pinesburg Keysville Mt. leasP ant Rocks 161 68 Lawn 77 Greenmont 25 Blackhorse 55 White Hall Elder Accident Midlothian Potomac 51 Pumkin Big pringS Thurmont 194 23 Center 56 11 27 Weisburg Jarrettsville 136 495 936 Vale Park Washington
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Stream Waders 10 Year Report
    MARYLAND STREAM WADERS TEN YEAR (2000-2009) REPORT October 2012 Maryland Stream Waders Ten Year (2000-2009) Report Prepared for: Maryland Department of Natural Resources Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division 580 Taylor Avenue; C-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 1-877-620-8DNR (x8623) [email protected] Prepared by: Daniel Boward1 Sara Weglein1 Erik W. Leppo2 1 Maryland Department of Natural Resources Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division 580 Taylor Avenue; C-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 2 Tetra Tech, Inc. Center for Ecological Studies 400 Red Brook Boulevard, Suite 200 Owings Mills, Maryland 21117 October 2012 This page intentionally blank. Foreword This document reports on the firstt en years (2000-2009) of sampling and results for the Maryland Stream Waders (MSW) statewide volunteer stream monitoring program managed by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division (MANTA). Stream Waders data are intended to supplementt hose collected for the Maryland Biological Stream Survey (MBSS) by DNR and University of Maryland biologists. This report provides an overview oft he Program and summarizes results from the firstt en years of sampling. Acknowledgments We wish to acknowledge, first and foremost, the dedicated volunteers who collected data for this report (Appendix A): Thanks also to the following individuals for helping to make the Program a success. • The DNR Benthic Macroinvertebrate Lab staffof Neal Dziepak, Ellen Friedman, and Kerry Tebbs, for their countless hours in
    [Show full text]
  • WSSC Update on Consent Decree Projects
    Presentation to the Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection Water Quality Advisory Group Consent Decree Projects in Montgomery County October 21, 2013 Discussion Points Sewer Repair, Rehabilitation & Replacement (SR3)Program Overview Basins in Montgomery County Consent Decree Project Overview Lateral Contracts Roads Contracts ESA Contracts Expectations During Construction Activities Questions SR3 Program Overview Background Federal Consent Decree between the United States, the State of Maryland, Citizen Groups and WSSC Priority 1 Assets must be completed by December 7, 2015 Large scale program to improve collection system performance and restore condition Reduce sewer overflows and backups Basins in Montgomery County •Cabin John •Dulles Interceptor •Little Falls •Muddy Branch •Monocacy •Northwest Branch •Paint Branch •Patuxent North •Rock Creek •Rock Run •Seneca Creek •Sligo Creek •Watts Branch Consent Decree Projects Overview Laterals Repair, replacement, and rehabilitation of sewer house connections (laterals) and the installation of cleanouts and mainline lateral connection seals. Lateral repairs will involve work between the main line sewer and the property line. Roads Repair, replacement, and rehabilitation of aging and defective sewers using Cured-In-Place Pipe (CIPP), pipe bursting, and open cut excavation. Work also includes chemical grout injection, internal spot repairs, external point repairs, manhole grouting and lining, and cleaning and inspection of sewers. Work occurs in neighborhoods and populated areas. Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) Sanitary sewer system rehabilitation utilizing mainly trenchless methods. Some repair work will require open cut methods. Work consists of the rehabilitating sewer mainline, lateral, and manhole systems. Work will be associated with stream restoration activities and the construction of temporary access roads in ESA.
    [Show full text]