DOCSLIB.ORG

Farm Creek and Marumsco Creek Watershed Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Farm Creek and Marumsco Creek Watershed Management Plan FARM CREEK AND MARUMSCO CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN PREPARED FOR: PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS PREPARED BY: ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT BRANCH HERNDON, VIRGINIA 5 COUNTY COMPLEX COURT PRINCE WILLIAM, VIRGINIA DECEMBER 2009 Farm Creek and Marumsco Creek PB Watershed Management Plan December 2009 Table of Contents Executive Summary...............................................................................................................................1 CHAPTER 1: Introduction .....................................................................................................................4 1.1 Background..............................................................................................................................4 1.2 Purpose ...................................................................................................................................4 1.3 Report Organization .................................................................................................................5 CHAPTER 2: Watershed Characterization............................................................................................6 2.1 General Watershed Characteristics ..........................................................................................6 2.1.1 Location and Scale...............................................................................................................6 2.1.2 Geomorphology....................................................................................................................8 2.1.3 Watershed History and Development.................................................................................. 15 2.1.4 Existing and Long Range Land Uses.................................................................................. 16 2.1.5 Storm Drain Infrastructure and Stormwater Management.................................................... 25 2.2 Summary of Reference Data and Reports .............................................................................. 27 2.2.1 Prince William County Stream Protection Strategy.............................................................. 27 2.2.2 Marumsco Acres Lake Litter Study ..................................................................................... 28 2.2.3 303(d) Listings and Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) .................................................. 28 CHAPTER 3: Watershed Assessment................................................................................................. 30 3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 30 3.2 Existing Flood Studies............................................................................................................ 30 3.3 Stream Corridor Assessments................................................................................................ 35 3.3.1 Assessment Protocol.......................................................................................................... 35 3.3.2 General Findings................................................................................................................ 36 3.4 Stormwater Management Facilities......................................................................................... 59 CHAPTER 4: Watershed Action Plan.................................................................................................. 61 4.1 Initial Watershed Management Strategies............................................................................... 61 4.2 Recommendations ................................................................................................................. 62 4.2.1 Stream Corridor Improvement ............................................................................................ 62 4.2.2 Flood Mitigation.................................................................................................................. 64 4.2.3 BMP Retrofits & Maintenance............................................................................................. 65 4.2.4 Geologic Water Quality Impacts ......................................................................................... 67 4.2.5 Coastal Zone Improvement ................................................................................................ 68 4.2.6 Maintenance and Outreach Programs ................................................................................ 71 4.2.7 Upland Considerations ....................................................................................................... 71 CHAPTER 5: References..................................................................................................................... 73 Appendix A: Project Concept Plans: Stream Corridor Improvements Appendix B: Inspection Reports: Stormwater Management Facilities Appendix C: Project Concept Plans: Coastal Zone Improvements Appendix D: FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMETTE’s) i Farm Creek and Marumsco Creek PB Watershed Management Plan December 2009 List of Figures Figure 2-1: Marumsco Creek and Farm Creek Subwatersheds ................................................................7 Figure 2-2: Geology within the Marumsco Creek and Farm Creek Watersheds ...................................... 11 Figure 2-3: Soil Types within the Marumsco Creek and Farm Creek Watersheds ................................... 14 Figure 3-1: Very Severe to Moderately Severe Rated Outfall Locations with Restoration Potential ......... 39 Figure 3-2: Erosion Site Locations ......................................................................................................... 42 Figure 3-3: Impacted Buffer Site Locations............................................................................................. 45 Figure 3-4: Utility Impact Site Locations ................................................................................................. 48 Figure 3-5: Trash and Debris Site Locations .......................................................................................... 51 Figure 3-6: Stream Crossing Site Locations ........................................................................................... 53 Figure 3-7: Channel Modification Site Locations..................................................................................... 56 Figure 3-8: SWM Facility Survey Locations............................................................................................ 60 List of Tables Table 2-1: Subwatershed Acreages .........................................................................................................6 Table 2-2: Summary of Primary Soil Types in Marumsco Creek and Farm Creek Watersheds................ 12 Table 2-3: Long Range Land Uses in Marumsco Creek and Farm Creek Watersheds............................ 25 Table 2-4: Stormwater Management Facilities........................................................................................ 26 Table 3-1: Number of Impact Assessment Sites..................................................................................... 36 Table 3-2: Observed Water Quality Impact Lengths ............................................................................... 36 Table 3-3: Outfall Severity Ratings......................................................................................................... 38 Table 3-4: Erosion Severity Ratings....................................................................................................... 41 Table 3-5: Impacted Buffer Severity Ratings .......................................................................................... 44 Table 3-6: Utility Crossing Severity Ratings............................................................................................ 47 Table 3-7: Trash and Debris Severity Ratings ........................................................................................ 50 Table 3-8: Stream Crossing Severity Ratings......................................................................................... 52 Table 3-9: Stream Crossing Severity Ratings......................................................................................... 54 Table 3-10: Coastal Zone Severity Ratings ............................................................................................ 58 Table 4-1: Stream Corridor Improvement Projects – Cost Estimates ...................................................... 63 Table 4-2: SWM Facility Survey Summary............................................................................................. 66 Table 4-3: SWM Facility Project Recommendations and Costs .............................................................. 67 Table 4-4: Coastal Zone Improvement Projects – Cost Estimates .......................................................... 70 ii Marumsco Creek and Farm Creek PB Watershed Management Plan December 2009 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study presents a watershed-based analysis of the Marumsco and Farm Creeks that involves assessment of the conditions and resources within the watersheds. The primary objective of this study is to assess stream corridor and stormwater management (SWM) best management practice (BMP) conditions to develop conceptual plans that can be used to prioritize and plan Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs) within the Marumsco Creek and Farm Creek watersheds. This study
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Shoreline Situation Report Counties of Fairfax and Arlington, City of Alexandria
    W&M ScholarWorks Reports 1979 Shoreline Situation Report Counties of Fairfax and Arlington, City of Alexandria Dennis W. Owen Virginia Institute of Marine Science Lynne C. Morgan Virginia Institute of Marine Science Nancy M. Sturm Virginia Institute of Marine Science Robert J. Byrne Virginia Institute of Marine Science Carl H. Hobbs III Virginia Institute of Marine Science Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/reports Part of the Environmental Indicators and Impact Assessment Commons, Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Recommended Citation Owen, D. W., Morgan, L. C., Sturm, N. M., Byrne, R. J., & Hobbs, C. H. (1979) Shoreline Situation Report Counties of Fairfax and Arlington, City of Alexandria. Special Report tn Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering No. 166. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, William & Mary. https://doi.org/10.21220/ V5K134 This Report is brought to you for free and open access by W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Reports by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Shoreline Situation Report COUNTIES OF FAIRFAX AND ARLINGTON, CITY OF ALEXANDRIA Prepared and Published With Funds Provided to the Commonwealth by the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric·Administration, Grant Nos. 04-7-158-44041 and 04-8-M01-309 Special Report In Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering Number 166 of the VIRGINIA INSTITUTE OF MARINE SCIENCE Gloucester Point, Virginia 23062 1979 Shoreline Situation Report COUNTIES OF FAIRFAX AND ARLINGTON, CITY OF AL.EXANDRIA Prepared by: Dennis W.
    [Show full text]
  • Authorization to Discharge Under the Virginia Stormwater Management Program and the Virginia Stormwater Management Act
    COMMONWEALTHof VIRGINIA DEPARTMENTOFENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Permit No.: VA0088587 Effective Date: April 1, 2015 Expiration Date: March 31, 2020 AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE VIRGINIA STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AND THE VIRGINIA STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ACT Pursuant to the Clean Water Act as amended and the Virginia Stormwater Management Act and regulations adopted pursuant thereto, the following owner is authorized to discharge in accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in this state permit. Permittee: Fairfax County Facility Name: Fairfax County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System County Location: Fairfax County is 413.15 square miles in area and is bordered by the Potomac River to the East, the city of Alexandria and the county of Arlington to the North, the county of Loudoun to the West, and the county of Prince William to the South. The owner is authorized to discharge from municipal-owned storm sewer outfalls to the surface waters in the following watersheds: Watersheds: Stormwater from Fairfax County discharges into twenty-two 6lh order hydrologic units: Horsepen Run (PL18), Sugarland Run (PL21), Difficult Run (PL22), Potomac River- Nichols Run-Scott Run (PL23), Potomac River-Pimmit Run (PL24), Potomac River- Fourmile Run (PL25), Cameron Run (PL26), Dogue Creek (PL27), Potomac River-Little Hunting Creek (PL28), Pohick Creek (PL29), Accotink Creek (PL30),(Upper Bull Run (PL42), Middle Bull Run (PL44), Cub Run (PL45), Lower Bull Run (PL46), Occoquan River/Occoquan Reservoir (PL47), Occoquan River-Belmont Bay (PL48), Potomac River- Occoquan Bay (PL50) There are 15 major streams: Accotink Creek, Bull Run, Cameron Run (Hunting Creek), Cub Run, Difficult Run, Dogue Creek, Four Mile Run, Horsepen Run, Little Hunting Creek, Little Rocky Run, Occoquan Receiving Streams: River, Pimmit run, Pohick creek, Popes Head Creek, Sugarland Run, and various other minor streams.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Water Resource and Related Data in Loudoun County, VA
    Summary of Water Resource and Related Data in Loudoun County, VA Prepared by: Loudoun County Department of Building & Development Water Resources Team September, 2008 Loudoun County - Water Resources Data Summary 1 Groundwater Data .................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Loudoun County Groundwater, Well, and Pollution Sources ......................................................................................................... 3 1.2 USGS Groundwater Wells ................................................................................................................................................................ 3 1.3 County Hydrogeologic Studies ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.4 USGS NAWQA Wells ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.5 WRMP Monitoring Wells................................................................................................................................................................. 3 1.6 Water Quality Data from LCSA and VADH Public Water Supplies ............................................................................................. 3 1.7 Luck Stone Special Exception Water Quality Reports ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Prince William County Tidal Marsh Inventory
    W&M ScholarWorks Reports 5-1975 Prince William County Tidal Marsh Inventory Kenneth A. Moore Virginia Institute of Marine Science Gene M. Silberhorn Virginia Institute of Marine Science Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/reports Part of the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Moore, K. A., & Silberhorn, G. M. (1975) Prince William County Tidal Marsh Inventory. Special Report in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering No. 78. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary. https://doi.org/10.21220/V55H9H This Report is brought to you for free and open access by W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Reports by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY TIDAL MARSH INVENTORY Special Report No. 78 in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering Kenneth A. Moore G.M. Silberhorn , Project Leader VIRGINIA INSTITUTE OF MARINE SCIENCE Gloucester Point, Virginia 23062 Dr. William J. Hargis, Jr., Director MAY 1975 Acknowledgments Funds for the publication and distribution of this report have been provided by the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Coastal Zone Management, Grant No. 04-5-158-5001. I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to Dr. Gene M. Silberhorn. His invaluable guidance and assistance made this report possible. I wish also to thank Col. George Dawes, for his review of this report and his assistance in the field and Dr. William J. Hargis, Dr. Michael E. Bender, Mr. James Mercer, Mr. Thomas Barnard, Miss Christine Plummer and Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Resources Technical Report
    TRANSFORM 66 OUTSIDE the Beltway I-66 CORRIDOR 66 IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT Multimodal Solutions - 495 to Haymarket Tier 2 Draft Environmental Assessment 193 Town of Natural Resources TechnicalTown of Report Middleburg Herndon LOUDOUN FAUQUIER 50 267 Washington Dulles McLean International Airport 309 28 286 Tysons Corner West Falls Church 7 Chantilly Dunn Loring FALLS 123 CHURCH 29 Vienna LOUDOUN Fair Lakes 50 FAIRFAX CO. 66 15 FAIRFAX CITY Centreville 286 29 236 Manassas National Battlefield Park Haymarket Fairfax Station Springfield 66 Gainesville 234 28 MANASSAS PARK PRINCE WILLIAM 29 FAUQUIER 234 123 286 215 Ft. Belvoir MANASSAS MAY 12, 2015 Tier 2 Draft Environmental Assessment Natural Resources Technical Report Draft – May 12, 2015 I-66 Corridor Improvements Project – Natural Resources Technical Report May 12, 2015 Table of Contents Chapter 1 – Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Project Description ..................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Methods ...................................................................................................................................... 1-2 Chapter 2 – Affected Environment ......................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Water Resources ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Corridor Analysis for the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail in Northern Virginia
    Corridor Analysis For The Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail In Northern Virginia June 2011 Acknowledgements The Northern Virginia Regional Commission (NVRC) wishes to acknowledge the following individuals for their contributions to this report: Don Briggs, Superintendent of the Potomac Heritage National Scenic Trail for the National Park Service; Liz Cronauer, Fairfax County Park Authority; Mike DePue, Prince William Park Authority; Bill Ference, City of Leesburg Park Director; Yon Lambert, City of Alexandria Department of Transportation; Ursula Lemanski, Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program for the National Park Service; Mark Novak, Loudoun County Park Authority; Patti Pakkala, Prince William County Park Authority; Kate Rudacille, Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority; Jennifer Wampler, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation; and Greg Weiler, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The report is an NVRC staff product, supported with funds provided through a cooperative agreement with the National Capital Region National Park Service. Any assessments, conclusions, or recommendations contained in this report represent the results of the NVRC staff’s technical investigation and do not represent policy positions of the Northern Virginia Regional Commission unless so stated in an adopted resolution of said Commission. The views expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the jurisdictions, the National Park Service, or any of its sub agencies. Funding for this report was through a cooperative agreement with The National Park Service Report prepared by: Debbie Spiliotopoulos, Senior Environmental Planner Northern Virginia Regional Commission with assistance from Samantha Kinzer, Environmental Planner The Northern Virginia Regional Commission 3060 Williams Drive, Suite 510 Fairfax, VA 22031 703.642.0700 www.novaregion.org Page 2 Northern Virginia Regional Commission As of May 2011 Chairman Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report •T DEPARTMENT of DIVISION of the TREASURY PENSIONS
    r1,~ ' ,} l' f2- PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF NEW JERSEY 1974 Annual Report •t DEPARTMENT OF DIVISION OF THE TREASURY PENSIONS PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF NEW JERSEY 20 West Front Street Trenton, New Jersey 08625 BOARD ANTHONY M. ORECCHIO, Chairman RICHARD C. LEONE, State Treasurer, Custodian LESTER H. GRUBMAN MARTIN LIPSCHUTZ CHARLES E. WAGNER JOSEPH J. SQUILLACE JOSEPH C. WERNER THEODORE SIENICKI THOMAS EVANS CHRISTOPHER F. CARSON, Secretary GEORGE B. BUCK CONSULTING ACTUARIES, INC. MEDICAL BOARD WILLIAM COLEMAN, M.D. DAVID ECKSTEIN, M.D. MURRAY SHEPP, M.D. To His Excellency Brendan T. Byrne Governor of the State of New Jersey Dear Sir: The Board of Trustees of the Public Employees' Retirement System is pleased to present its Twentieth Annual Report in compliance with the provisions of N.J .S.A. 43: l 5A-2 l. Respectfully submitted, ANTHONY M. ORECCHIO Chairman 2 Annual Report As a result of the annual election Mr. Charles E. Wagner and Mr. Anthony M. Orecchio were re-elected to three-year terms commencing July l, 1973. Mr. Theodore Sienicki was elected to a three-year term and Mr. Joseph C. Werner a two-year term, both also commencing July l, 1973. 3 MEMBERSHIP A summary of the membership activity for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1974 follows: 30,310-enrollments 2,960- retirements 16,381 - active accounts terminated through separation from employment 795 - deaths before retirement Comparative data on membership for selected June 30 periods since 1955 follows: Retirants & June 30 Active Beneficiaries Total 1955
    [Show full text]
  • Benthic Tmdls for the Goose Creek Watershed
    Benthic TMDLs for the Goose Creek Watershed Submitted by Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Prepared by Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin March 1, 2004 Revised April 27, 2004 ICPRB Report 04-5 This report has been prepared by the staff of the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin. Support was provided by the Virginia Department of Environment Quality and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and should not be construed as representing the opinions or policies of the United States or any of its agencies, the several states, or the Commissioners of the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin. Benthic TMDLs for the Goose Creek Watershed Submitted by Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Prepared by Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin March 1, 2004 Revised April 27, 2004 __________________________________________ Benthic TMDLs For the Goose Creek Watershed TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................I LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................IV LIST OF FIGURES ..............................................................................................................VI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Middle Potomac River Watershed Assessment: Potomac River Sustainable Flow and Water Resources Analysis
    Middle Potomac River Watershed Assessment: Potomac River Sustainable Flow and Water Resources Analysis April 2014 Middle Potomac River Watershed Assessment: Potomac River Sustainable Flow and Water Resources Analysis United States Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District The Natural Conservancy Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin Final Report April 2014 Recommended citation: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, The Nature Conservancy, and Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin. 2014. Middle Potomac River Watershed Assessment: Potomac River Sustainable Flow and Water Resources Analysis. Final Report. 107 pp. and 11 appendices. Cover photograph: Great Falls on the Potomac River as seen from Virginia. Jim Palmer (ICPRB) Middle Potomac River Watershed Assessment Abstract The Middle Potomac River Watershed Assessment (MPRWA) was a collaborative effort to assess the relationship between streamflow alteration and ecological response in the Potomac River and its tributaries in a study area defined as the Middle Potomac. The assessment is comprised of five distinct components: (1) a large river environmental flow needs assessment, (2) a stream and small rivers environmental flow needs assessment, (3) a projection of future water uses, (4) a stakeholder engagement process, and (5) development of a concept or scope for a strategic comprehensive plan for watershed management. This information can be used to balance and mitigate water use conflicts and prevent ecological degradation. To assess flow needs in the Potomac watershed, the Ecologically Sustainable Water Management (ESWM) approach was used for large rivers and the Ecological Limits of Hydrologic Alteration (ELOHA) framework was adapted for streams and small rivers. In the large rivers included in this study, based on currently available information, there has been no discernible adverse ecological impact on focal species due to human modification of flows.
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment C Receiving Waters by Watershed
    ATTACHMENT C RECEIVING WATERS BY WATERSHED ACCOTINK CREEK ACCOTINK BAY ACCOTINK CREEK BEAR BRANCH CALAMO RUN COON BRANCH CROOK BRANCH DANIELS RUN FIELD LARK BRANCH FLAG RUN GUNSTON COVE HUNTERS BRANCH KERNAN RUN LAKE ACCOTINK LONG BRANCH MASON RUN POHICK BAY TURKEY RUN BELLE HAVEN CAMERON RUN HUNTING CREEK POTOMAC RIVER QUANDER BROOK BULL NECK RUN BLACK POND BULLNECK RUN POTOMAC RIVER BULL RUN BULL RUN CAMERON RUN BACKLICK RUN CAMERON RUN COW BRANCH FAIRVIEW LAKE HOLMES RUN INDIAN RUN LAKE BARCROFT PIKES BRANCH POPLAR RUN TRIPPS RUN TURKEYCOCK CREEK TURKEYCOCK RUN Page 1 of 12 CUB RUN BIG ROCKY RUN BULL RUN CAIN BRANCH CUB RUN DEAD RUN ELKLICK RUN FLATLICK BRANCH FROG BRANCH OXLICK BRANCH ROCKY RUN ROUND LICK ROUND RUN SAND BRANCH SCHNEIDER BRANCH UPPER OCCOQUAN SEWAGE AUTHORITY DEAD RUN DEAD RUN POTOMAC RIVER DIFFICULT RUN ANGELICO BRANCH BRIDGE BRANCH BROWNS BRANCH CAPTAIN HICKORY RUN COLVIN MILL RUN COLVIN RUN DIFFICULT RUN DOG RUN FOX LAKE HICKORY RUN LAKE ANNE LAKE AUDUBON LAKE FAIRFAX LAKE NEWPORT LAKE THOREAU LITTLE DIFFICULT RUN MOONAC CREEK OLD COURTHOUSE SPRING BRANCH PINEY BRANCH PINEY RUN POTOMAC RIVER ROCKY BRANCH ROCKY RUN SHARPERS RUN SNAKEDEN BRANCH SOUTH FORK RUN Page 2 of 12 THE GLADE TIMBER LAKE WOLFTRAP CREEK WOLFTRAP RUN WOODSIDE LAKE DOGUE CREEK ACCOTINK BAY BARNYARD RUN DOGUE CREEK DOGUE RUN GUNSTON COVE LAKE D'EVEREUX NORTH FORK DOGUE CREEK PINEY RUN POTOMAC RIVER FOUR MILE RUN CAMERON RUN FOUR MILE RUN HUNTING CREEK LONG BRANCH POTOMAC RIVER HIGH POINT BELMONT BAY GUNSTON COVE MASON NECK OCCOQUAN BAY POHICK BAY
    [Show full text]
  • A Water-Quality Study of the Tidal Potomac River and Estuary an Overview
    A WATER-QUALITY STUDY OF THE TIDAL POTOMAC RIVER AND ESTUARY AN OVERVIEW * *- » -/ ,,*¥ if** v. < , ' ^ J V T * ' V-^^VX » «>* (>.> V A WATER-QUALITY STUDY OF THE TIDAL POTOMAC RIVER AND ESTUARY AN OVERVIEW Edited by Edward Callender, Virginia Carter, D. C. Hahl, Kerie Hitt, and Barbara I. Schultz U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 2233 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1984 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 This interdisciplinary effort emphasized studies FOREWORD of the transport of the major nutrient species and of suspended sediment. The movement of these sub­ Tidal rivers and estuaries are very important stances through five major reaches or control volumes features of the Coastal Zone because of their immense of the tidal Potomac River and Estuary was determined biological productivity and their proximity to centers of during 1980 and 1981. This effort provided a commerce and population. Most of the shellfish and framework on which to assemble a variety of investiga­ much of the local finfish consumed by man are harvest­ tions: ed from estuaries and tidal rivers. Many of the world's (1) The generation and deposition of sediments, largest shipping ports are located within estuaries. nutrients, and trace metals from the Holocene to the Many estuaries originate as river valleys drowned by present was determined by sampling surficial bottom rising sea level and are geologically ephemeral features, sediments and analyzing their characteristics and distri­ destined eventually to fill with sediments.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of Middlesex County Ended As the County’S Original Settlers Were Permanently Displaced by the European Newcomers
    HISTORY BUFF’S THETHE HITCHHIKER’SHITCHHIKER’S GUIDEGUIDE TOTO MIDDLESEXMIDDLESEX COUNTYCOUNTY “N.E. View of New Brunswick, N.J.” by John W. Barber and Henry Howe, showing the Delaware and Raritan Canal, Raritan River, and railroads in the county seat in 1844. Thomas A. Edison invented the Phonograph at Menlo Park (part of Edison) in 1877. Thomas Edison invented the incandescent Drawing of the Kilmer oak tree by Joan Labun, New Brunswick, 1984. Tree, which light bulb at Menlo Park (part of Edison) in inspired the Joyce Kilmer poem “Trees” was located near the Rutgers Labor Education 1879. Center, just south of Douglass College. Carbon Filament Lamp, November 1879, drawn by Samuel D. Mott MIDDLESEX COUNTY BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS Christopher D. Rafano, Freeholder Director Ronald G. Rios, Deputy Director Carol Barrett Bellante Stephen J. Dalina H. James Polos Charles E. Tomaro Blanquita B. Valenti Compiled and written by: Walter A. De Angelo, Esq. County Administrator (1994-2008) The following individuals contributed to the preparation of this booklet: Clerk of the Board of Chosen Freeholders Margaret E. Pemberton Middlesex County Cultural & Heritage Commission Anna M. Aschkenes, Executive Director Middlesex County Department of Business Development & Education Kathaleen R. Shaw, Department Head Carl W. Spataro, Director Stacey Bersani, Division Head Janet Creighton, Administrative Assistant Middlesex County Office of Information Technology Khalid Anjum, Chief Information Officer Middlesex County Administrator’s Office John A. Pulomena, County Administrator Barbara D. Grover, Business Manager Middlesex County Reprographics Division Mark F. Brennan, Director Janine Sudowsky, Graphic Artist ii TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... Page 1 THE NAME ................................................................................... Page 3 THE LAND ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]