Management plans for significant plant and wildlife habitat areas of Maryland's Western shore : Anne Arundel County final report

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

MANAGEMENT PLANS,
FOR SIGNIFICANT
PLANT AND WILDLIFE
MARYLAND HABITAT AREAS
NATURAL OF MARYLAND'S
HERITAGE WESTERN SHORE:
PROGRAM ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY

Prepared by

Katharine A. McCarthy
Judith L Robertson
Richard R Wiegand
J. Christopher Ludwig

Helonlas bullata
SWAMP PINK
.@@,A,ENT OF

QH
76.2
-M3
M433784
1988

& wl

MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR

SIGNIFICANT PLANT AND WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS OF

MARYLAND'S WESTERN SHORE: ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY

FINAL REPORT

SUBMITTED TO:

Coastal Resources Division
Tidewater Administration

SUBMITTED BY:

Katharine A. McCarthy
Judith L. Robertson
Richard H. Wiegand
J. Christopher Ludwig

Maryland Natural Heritage Program
Forest, Park and Wildlife Service
Department of Natural Resources

December 31, 1988

Preparation of this report was partially
funded by the Office of ocean and Coastal
Resources Management, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration

MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR SIGNIFICANT
PLANT AND WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS OF
MARYLAND'S WESTERN SHORE: ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ................................................. 1

SECTION 1: Procedures of site selection, methods of
protection implementation, and the long-term
framework established by this project

Introduction ..................................... 3
Site Identification .............................. 3
Field Inventory .................................. 5
Strategy for Selecting Significant Sites ......... 5
Site Protection Implementation Methods ........... 6
Long-Term Framework .............................. 9

SECTION 2: Protection Area Summaries

Introduction ..................................... 10
County Map ....................................... 12
Protection Area Summaries
Benfield Bottomland ........................... 14
Fort George G. Meade .......................... 17
Freetown Swamp ................................ 21
Gumbottom Wetland ............................. 24
John Wesley Church ............................ 29
North Gray's Bog .............................. 32
Patuxent Maple Swamp .......................... 35
Patuxent Wildlife Research Center ............. 38
Shady Pond .................................... 41
Stony Run ..................................... 43
Watershed Woods ............................... 46

REFERENCES ................................................... 48

APPENDIX A: Regulations under COMAR 08.03.08
Threatened and Endangered Species

rs repartment Of COmTnerce
c-)astai s--@rvic 3 c,ntar Library
17- 11 Il C"n

toll,

INTRODUCTION

In 1986 this project was initiated by the Coastal Resources
Division of the Department of Natural Resources' Tidewater
Administration. The'task was designed to develop the information
base and to determine the management mechanisms needed to
implement an alternative approach to the State Critical Area
Program for addressing the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act's
requirement to designate Geographic Areas of Particular Concern
(GAPC) and Areas for Preservation and Restoration (APR). Under
the GAPC requirements, coastal states are to inventory and
develop management measures to protect the integrity of "areas of
unique, scarce, fragile or vulnerable natural habitat" and "areas
of high natural productivity or essential habitat for living
resources, including fish, wildlife, and endangered species and
the various trophic levels in the food web critical to their
well-being." Under the APR requirement, coastal states are to
include in their Coastal Zone Management Programs "provisions for
procedures whereby specific areas may be designated for the
purpose of preserving or restoring them for their conservation,
recreational, ecological or aesthetic values." This project
covers the Coastal Plain Counties of Maryland excluding land
within the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area.

To accomplish this task, a contract was awarded to the
Maryland Natural Heritage Program, a division of the Forest, Park
and Wildlife Service. The mission of the Natural Heritage
Program is to identify and help preserve the biological and
ecological diversity of Maryland. Since 1979, this program has
been devoted to the collection of information about the State's
rare, threatened, and endangered species and habitats. The
program's extensive data base provided the basis for the
identification of outstanding habitat examples on Maryland's
Eastern and Western Shores.

By January 1987, the Coastal Resources Division and the
Maryland Natural Heritage Program established specific objectives
to accomplish the first phase of this project. These objectives
were:

1. identify criteria for the selection of significant
plant and wildlife habitat areas;

2. undertake field inventory of areas identified in
existing studies and data files of the Maryland Natural
Heritage Program that are likely to be of ecological
significance, in order to identify species and habitats

associated with each site;

3. undertake field inventory of potentially significant
habitats not previously identified in the database of
the Maryland Natural Heritage Program in order to
determine if rare species or habitats are associated
with these sites;

4. determine threats to each area and determine management
mechanisms for protecting the integrity of these areas;

5. determine protection boundaries for each site including
needed buffer areas; and

6. collect other locational information needed in order to
implement management mechanisms for each site.

These objectives combine to produce a protection package in which
significant habitats (referred to as areas or sites) are assigned
management mechanisms within a designated boundary. In
accordance with the Natural Heritage Program's methodology, this
area is then labeled a protection area.

In December 1987, the Natural Heritage Program reported on
protection areas identified on Maryland's Eastern Shore from Kent
County south. With financial assistance from the Coastal
Resources Division, Baltimore and Harford Counties hired
personnel in 1987 and 1988 to identify protection areas in their
counties. In 1988, Prince Georges County funded a staff member
(with financial assistance from the Coastal Resources Division)
to identify protection areas on private property. Therefore, the
Natural Heritage Program did not include Baltimore and Harford
Counties in its survey and report of protection areas on the
Western Shore, and focused only on public land in Prince Georges
County.

Section 1 of this report provides a detailed description of
the project methodology, scope of work, and the long-term
framework established through the project. Section 2 provides
Protection Area Summaries for significant habitat areas which
have been identified. The Protection Area Summary contains
information needed for site protection. A selection of
applicable references follows Section 2. Appendix A contains a
copy of the Department of Natural Resource's Regulations [COMAR
08.03.08] concerning the State's Threatened and Endangered
Species.

SECTION 1

Procedures of Site Selection. Methods of Protection
Implementation, and the Long-term Framework Established
by this Project

INTRODUCTION:

This section provides all technical information on the
project procedures from the planning stages, when habitat areas
were selected for field survey, through the site visit, to the
selection of the site for protection. Following this
information, the report presents methods of implementing
protection for selected sites. Finally, the long-term framework
established by this project is discussed.

SITE IDENTIFICATION:

Sites identified for inventory were located throughout the
Coastal Plain Counties excluding the Chesapeake Bay Critical
Area. Significant plant and wildlife habitats were identified
from the following categories of sites employing the methods
described for each type.

1. Sites potentially inhabited by State Endangered or
Threatened Species.

Methods: Data concerning the habitat, phenology,
and taxonomy of each listed species were gathered
from regional floristic surveys and scientific
literature. Sites were located by using the
habitat data in conjunction with National Wetland
Inventory maps, aerial infrared photographs, and
county soil surveys. These sites were surveyed
when the rare species potentially inhabiting the
sites could be identified accurately.

2. Sites with historical occurrences (reported prior
to 1980) of species determined to be rare by the
Natural Heritage Program and found in their
publication, Threatened and Endangered Plants and
Animals of Maryland (Norden et al., 1984).

Methods: For each species, data were gathered
concerning habitat, phenology, and taxonomy. Many
of the historical records provided only general
locations for rare species. For these records,

more specific locations for survey were selected
based upon habitat data supplemented by National
Wetland Inventory maps, aerial infrared
photographs, and county soil surveys. The field
staff surveyed sites when the rare species could
be accurately identified if found.

3. Non-tidal wetlands.

Methods: National Wetland Inventory maps and
aerial infrared photographs were used to locate
non-tidal wetlands. Particular attention was
given to wetlands in State Parks, Forests and
Wildlife Management Areas. Based upon the
findings of "The Functional Assessment of Non-
tidal Wetlands," a report completed for the
Coastal Resources Division by the Maryland Natural
Heritage Program (Bartgis 1986), these wetlands
were assigned priorities for survey. High and
intermediate priority wetlands listed below were
candidates for intensive survey.

a. Non-tidal Wetland Complex, i.e., two or more
contiguous wetland communities with one of
the following traits:

i. For complexes under 10 acres, presence
of at least two wetland communities;

ii. For 10- to 100-acre complexes, presence
of at least four wetland communities; or

iii. For complexes greater than 100 acres,
presence of at least six communities.

b. Seasonal Ponds: wetlands occurring mainly on
Pocomoke soils in centripetally-drained,
seasonally flooded basins dominated by
Walter's Sedge or Twigrush.

C. Bogs: highly acidic wetlands characterized
by highly organic soils and/or sphagnum.

d. Palustrine Forested Deciduous Wetlands (PF01)
with at least one of the following
characteristics:

i. Seeps

ii. vernal pools

iii. Well-developed stratification

e. Palustrine Forested Evergreen Wetlands (PF04)
dominated by Bald Cypress or Atlantic White
Cedar.

FIELD INVENTORY:

observations and data were collected in the field concerning
the general character of each site, the degree of unnatural
disturbance, and, if present, the condition of the rare species
populations. Prior to surveying sites on private land,
permission was obtained from landowners.

First, the natural features of each site were described,
noting the dominant vegetation, aquatic features, physical
relief, and natural disturbances (such as insect defoliation or
trees felled by high winds). A list of the common plant species
was developed and unique communities were identified and mapped.

When rare species were found, the size and extent of their
populations were estimated. Staff members also estimated the
proportion of the population that was flowering and fruiting, and
marked the population on the general map of the site. The
microhabitats of the rare species were described. If a
population was large, voucher specimens of the rare species were
collected and deposited with the Natural Heritage Program. Small
populations of rare species were photographed for verification.
If rare species were absent from historical locations, the
habitat was assessed to determine if it could still support the
species or if the habitat had been altered such that the species
could no longer survive.

Finally, the habitat integrity of each site was assessed.
Staff members recorded unnatural disturbances and their current
and potential future effects on the habitat. For example, the
presence of ditches in non-tidal wetlands was reported, and the
effects of the ditches on wetland hydrology and vegetation were
reviewed. Threats to the integrity of the habitat were
discussed. current and potential future uses of surrounding land
were considered. In light of these threats, staff members
recommended management activities intended to maintain the
habitat and sustain the populations of rare species.

STRATEGY FOR SELECTING SIGNIFICANT SITES:

The selection of ecologically significant sites for
protection was based on the following criteria which were
assessed during the field inventory:

1. Site contains species that are
considered by the Maryland Natural
Heritage Program as Rare, Threatened or
Endangered in Maryland (see Norden, et
al, 1984). Many of these species are
listed in the revised Department of
Natural Resource's Regulations under
COMAR 08.03.08.

2. Site contains one or more rare or ecologically
unique natural communities.

3. Overall ecologic integrity of the site is high.
Unnatural disturbances must be minimal or must be
such that their effects simulate natural forces of
disturbance.

4. Human-induced threats which could lead to the loss
of the rare species or habitat(s) must be minimal.

5. Regulation and monitoring must be feasible so that
activities (both on-site and nearby) can be
limited to those that do not negatively impact the
rare species and natural habitat(s). Required
buffer zones must be available to ensure site
protection.

6. Ecologic, scenic, or historic values other than
those related to rare species and habitat
protection may be present.

SITE PROTECTION IMPLEMENTATION METHODS:

Protection may be implemented in a variety of ways depending
upon ecological significance of the site, type of ownership
(public vs. private), seriousness of threats, degree of
management required, and landowner preference. The various
options confer varying degrees of protection security and of
landowner control. They range from designations that afford no
legal protection to acquisition by a conservation organization.
The following list describes the available options and the degree
of protection that they provide. Because the significance and
consequences of each mechanism vary, some sites may be protected
by a combination of methods.

Natural area protection may be accomplished by several types
of organizations. Federal, State, and local governments (at the
County as well as the municipal levels) have specific tools and
mechanisms by which they may set aside or regulate land for
conservation purposes. In addition, there are private
organizations that can either protect lands on their own or

facilitate the efforts of the public sector. Many of the
protection mechanisms listed below may be implemented by any of
the aforementioned conservation organizations, while others may
only be available to certain agencies or organizations.

The following methods afford protection to rare species
habitat by outlining and assigning management responsibilities to
a particular party:

1. Voluntary management agreement - landowner
informally agrees to protect the rare species and
habitat by not disturbing the site.

2. Registration - landowner signs a written,
nonbinding agreement with the State's Department
of Natural Resources, a county government, The
Nature Conservancy, or another private
conservation organization, officially recognizing
the ecological significance of the site.
Management needs are outlined and the landowner
agrees to perform specified tasks to protect rare
species and habitat.

3. Legally binding protection agreement - landowner
enters a legally binding management agreement or
leases the land to a conservation organization for
management purposes. Conservation easements
granted by the Maryland Environmental Trust, local
government, and other private trusts (including
The Nature Conservancy) impose certain land-use
restrictions while conferring tax benefits to the
landowner.

4. Zoning - the site may be zoned or rezoned as a
conservation area in which land-use is restricted.
Development may be highly regulated or prohibited.
Such protection is usually accomplished on a
county level through local ordinances.

5. Bequest or Right of First Refusal - landowner
agrees to will land or give right of first refusal
for acquisition to a State, county, or private
conservation organization at some undetermined
time in the future.

6. Acquisition - landowner conveys property to a
conservation organization or public agency. The
transfer may be a donation, a bargain sale (i.e.,
below market value) or a fee simple (i.e., full
market value) transaction. The first two types of
transaction confer tax benefits to the landowner.
All rights to the land belong to the buyer and

management is directed toward the protection of
rare species and habitat(s). In some cases,
acquisition may occur with the retention of a life
estate for the owner. This allows the landowner
to continue to live on and have restricted use of
the property until death, at which time the buyer
obtains full control.

The following methods are designations which afford no
current protection but which serve to acknowledge the ecological
significance of a site and which may be used to stimulate further
protection efforts:

1. National Registry of Natural Landmarks - land
which is determined to be a nationally significant
example of the Nation's natural heritage may be
designated a National Natural Landmark by the
Secretary of the Interior.

2. Sensitive Management Areas - land within the State
Park System which is considered in need of special
protection because of its unique and fragile
physiography, flora, and fauna may be designated a
"Sensitive Management Area" and is reserved for
only those activities compatible with
preservation.

3. Maryland Wildlands Preservation System - land
which has retained its wilderness character or
which has rare species or similar features of
interest worthy of preservation for use of present
and future residents of the State may be termed
"wildland.11

4. Natural Heritage Area - land which meets all three
of the criteria listed in the revised Regulations
under COMAR 08.03.08 Threatened and Endangered
species may be designated a Natural Heritage Area
subject to the approval of the Secretary of
Natural Resources.

Information provided in the Protection Area Summaries of
this report is used to assess the degree of protection needed.

LONG-TERM FRAMEWORK:

This project provides a foundation for tasks to begin in
1989. These tasks, described below, involve the further
identification and protection of significant habitats within the
coastal zone.

In 1989 the focus of this project will be the protection of
significant habitats identified in 1987 and 1988. Efforts were
initiated in 1988 to protect significant habitats imminently
threatened by development or other human-induced habitat
alterations. These efforts will be expanded in 1989 to include
additional significant habitats of highest priority for
protection. Substantial effort will be required to protect each
site, and this task should continue into the 1990s.

Next year the methodology developed in this project will be
used to continue to identify significant plant and wildlife
habitats in the Coastal Plain of Maryland. Protection Area
Summaries identical in format to those prepared in 1987 and 1988
will be completed for significant habitats. These sites will be
candidates for protection within the framework of this project.

SECTION 2

Protection Area Summaries

INTRODUCTION:

The remainder of this report contains site-specific
protection information for all selected areas. Each of these
areas is reviewed in a Protection Area Summary (PAS) that
describes the protection area, its values, and its protection
needs. The PAS is composed of several parts, each of which is
discussed below. Format and content are best understood with the
insight provided in this section.

Protection Area Name - An identifying name has been assigned to
each protection area. This is usually based on the site's
location and/or habitat type.

County - The county in which the protection area is located is
given.

USGS Quad(s) - Identifies the United States Geological Survey
topographic map(s) on which the protection area occurs.

SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE - States the major reasons for
protecting the site. The features of greatest ecological
significance are described, such as the presence of rare species
or unique habitat.

OTHER SIGNIFICANCE AND VALUES - This section describes other
important aspects of the protection area.

The value of the protection area to wildlife and for
ecosystem maintenance may be discussed. In setting aside rare
species habitat (which includes additional buffer land), a safe
haven is provided for wildlife and for the perpetuation of the
natural processes that sustain the ecosystem.

Many of the proposed protection areas are adjacent to or
part of designated management areas. They may overlap with or
abut State Forests or Parks, State Scenic Rivers, Natural
Heritage Areas or Nature Conservancy preserves. By increasing
the size and/or protection of these areas, their ecologic and
scenic values may be enhanced.

THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS - Both potential and current threats
to the rare species or to the natural habitat are described.
These are generally related to human-induced habitat alterations,
such as forest cutting, hydrologic alteration, vehicular traffic,
or powerline maintenance practices. In some cases, however,

there are natural threats such as insect infestation or natural
succession.

Specific management recommendations are then given.
Voluntary management agreements are often suggested. In some
cases, monitoring of rare species populations is recommended.
Such studies are needed in order to learn more about the
demographics and ecological requirements of the rare plants and
to provide warnings of serious population declines.

BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS - The proposed protection area is
delineated by a line termed the protection area boundary. The
habitats to be included within this boundary are described and
the reasons for their inclusion are given. Within this boundary
the threats listed in the previous section should be avoided to
protect the significant habitat and rare species. Land within
the Chesapeake Bay critical Area is not included within the
boundaries of the protection areas.

Within the protection area boundary, a buffer has been
placed around the core rare species habitat. This zone consists
of adjacent land needed to protect the critical habitat from the
impacts of land use in surrounding areas. When the critical
habitat is a wetland, lands which drain into it are included as
buffer. Surrounding forest may be designated for many reasons.
These include maintaining canopy cover to prevent the invasion,of
weedy or non-native species, stabilizing soils to prevent
sedimentation of waterways, filtering out chemicals or excess
nutrients, and maintaining hydrology.

The delineation of buffers varies depending on the type of
habitat, surrounding land use, habitat requirements of the rare
species, local hydrology, and possible future threats.
Reasonable and effective buffers were determined after careful
consideration of these factors.

Maps (with a scale of 1:24000) and additional information
concerning boundary locations are available from the Natural
Heritage Program.

SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY - Finally, a general description of the
protection area is given. Each natural community is discussed
and its relationship to surrounding communities is described.
Often the hydrologic regime of the community and the range of
seasonal variability of water table depth are provided. Dominant
trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants are listed.

Note: Common names for species are used throughout the
Protection Area Summary except when no common name is available.
When a specific species is named, the common name is capitalized.

ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY

:BROOKLYN

2295

4 62
170're ans
2 -m_ or. Riviera
.1to.w. .73 Beach
Waterloo Airport G. E BUR I
:".3 arun', e
-a Bay Side
r, s GrZ
H a Beach
rml er 1732 Bodkin
EVE RNt- 174
e Jacottsvill Pt.
2 SOUTHGATE=_- LAKE
Pinehurst
A nao I @F idgeway 1002'SHORE
i Juncq asadena," I
P 1-
3 648
70
MIA'I Penfield
3 MEAD(
[email protected],D E N T
.0 GIBSON
M@@ncl SK ISLAND
A
city + E-2 ,,
175
175
lo@
T .2
Garnbrills A. An- A,--L--%
3U".Co ape St. Claire
TIONAL --M
TI-1 C I
DLIFE
3 ARN POINT
REFQG@ I Q L-1-T SANDY
STATE PARK
!@Conaw F 3 @0
1Sh'
'6row 'rest 2) 101
aYs Lnsville
So- 51".
CoHeqe 179 Skicirrior
-P-1 C-le,
23 P
CR-OVTON 450 @,,i Sh.p (ro,,""D@j
@Pries
3 Paro,i, R.. D. C-W
(IBridg 50, 6 1j S, Naval Acadmi,
)301 665 ANNAPOLIS
Riva wat'
Bay Ridge
1424 Steuarts jr. '
3 ?S3 Sh es -,gha nd Beach
Dav clsonville n2 Arundel on
Collin
2C .
-i4 �Z@Tl'.hrir!.B@aFyt.
3
3 South I@y Beach
Birdsville, Riv@@
-TUXENl` tM*0
2
--Now Beverley Beach
Marriott Hill i@6`8 ICheston Pt.
Harwood
jit,
boyaro lalewilde
Sady Side
Mt
Lo t n i a n
Du @,z4=0 8@
r e e n c, c k rcloton X-t7
/B,,stol 256
LP-1
Trac,ys tale
Ep -Landing NutwE?l ji,,iv
Lyons i5aney.'
Cree@
'23rhaven
Fai

Frie dship
Rose Haven

SCALE

12 M!1 EZ;

0
-P@
Dle
NutwE?Ir

Locations of Protection Areas of significant habitat.
Sites are numbered in order from north to south.
(See page 13 for Protection Area names corresponding
to numbers given above.)

ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY: Protection Area Locations

Protection Area site # on
County Map

Benfield Bottomland ...........................5
Fort George G. Meade ..........................3
Freetown Swamp ................................2
Gumbottom Wetland .............................9
John Wesley Church ............................7
North Gray's Bog ..............................4
Patuxent Maple Swamp ......................... 11
Patuxent Wildlife Research Center .............8
Shady Pond ....................................6
Stony Run .....................................1
Watershed Woods .............................. 10

site # on
County Map Protection Area

1...................................... Stony Run
2................................ Freetown Swamp
3.......................... Fort George G. Meade
4.............................. North Gray's Bog
5........................... Benfield Bottomland
6.................................... Shady Pond
7............................ John Wesley Church
8............. Patuxent Wildlife Research Center
9............................. Gumbottom Wetland
10 .............................. Watershed Woods
11 ......................... Patuxent Maple Swamp

PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY

Protection Area Name: Benfield Bottomland

County: Anne Arundel USGS Quad: Odenton

SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE:

Excellent examples of deciduous and mixed pine-deciduous
bottomland forests border the streams that flow through this
protection area. Percolation through the adjacent sandy uplands
provides a significant source of fresh water to these bottomland
forests. The steep, highly erodible slopes that border much of
the main stream are unsuitable for development or cultivation.
These forested slopes maintain the high quality of groundwater
that feeds the bottomland forests. The sandy soil of the uplands
is very low in nutrients and supports an oak-pine forest
community that is more common on the Eastern Shore.

In the dense cover of shrubs, vines, and herbaceous species
that borders the main stream grows a rare plant that is known
from only four other sites in Maryland. The population along
this stream is extensive. Patches of the rare species dot one
mile of the stream's eastern bank. More than one thousand plants
occur within the protection area. The rare plants appear to be
reproducing successfully and the population appears stable.
Because this population is large and the habitat quality of the
bottomland and adjacent upland forests is high, this site
provides the best opportunity to preserve this rare species in
Maryland.

A small population of a second rare species grows in the
semi-permanently flooded bottomland forest downstream from the
other rare species. This species is known from just seven other
sites in the State.

OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE:

The large, contiguous forest within this protection area
provides excellent habitat for forest interior dwelling birds.

Paths along the stream's eastern bank are well-used and
reveal that this area is visited frequently by hikers. The
bottomland and upland forests provide opportunities for
birdwatching and environmental education.

THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS:

Threats

The rare plants are intermittently flooded by the main
stream and a decline in the water quality or flow rate of this
stream may be detrimental to these species.

The cutting of trees within and near the protection area may
cause erosion and sedimentation of the bottomland. Non-native,
weedy species may invade the openings created by cutting trees.
Already Japanese Honeysuckle grows in a few areas near the stream
and may exclude the rare plants from these areas.

Management Needs

Activities that would alter the quantity of water flowing
through the protection area should not be permitted. In
addition, activities that would reduce the water quality of the
main stream or its tributaries should not be permitted.

The cutting of trees should not occur within the bottomland
of the protection area and on the adjacent slopes unless required
for safety along the county roads that bisect the protection
area. Plans to clear land adjacent to the protection area should
be reviewed for potential effects on the rare species' habitat.

The size and reproductive success of the rare species
populations should be monitored. The size of populations of non-
native species should be monitored. If the non-native species
appear to threaten the rare species, steps should be taken to
control the growth of non-native species.

BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS:

The protection boundary incorporates the rare species
bottomland habitat and adjacent forested slopes that drain into
the bottomland.

SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY:

Sweet Gum, Red Maple, and Greenbrier dominate the bottomland
of this 540 acre protection area. Grasses are also abundant.
Where the bottomland is narrowest and the adjacent slopes are
steep, Loblolly Pine is abundant. A rare species grows along one
mile of the stream channel, both near the stream and near the
upland. The sandy uplands support a forest of Chestnut Oak,
Southern Red Oak, White Oak, Pitch Pine, and Virginia Pine.

Mountain Laurel and blueberry are common in some sections but the
herbaceous cover is sparse.

Businesses and private homes nearly surround the protection
area. Roads bisect the protection area near the southern and
western borders. A large powerline crosses the western end of
Benfield Bottomland.

Prepared by: Katharine A. McCarthy

Date: December 1988

PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY.

Protection Area Name: Fort George G. Meade

County: Anne Arundel USGS Quads: Laurel,
Odenton

SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE:

Over 6900 acres of nearly contiguous forest occur on Fort
George G. Meade south of Route 198. Approximately 1200 acres of
this area is old bottomland and swamp forest within the 100 year
floodplains of the Patuxent and Little Patuxent Rivers. The
upland forest is composed of stands of various ages. In
conjunction with forests on adjacent Federal lands managed by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, and the National Air and Space Administration, the
forests of Fort Meade are part of one of the largest contiguous
tracts of forest remaining in central Maryland. Commercial and
residential development and clearing for agriculture and timber
harvest have fragmented the forests of this region, leaving small
isolated patches. Many species of wildlife and plants native to
this region cannot survive in the small patches of forest, and
their populations are declining in central Maryland. The
extensive contiguous forests of Fort Meade and adjacent Federal
lands offer outstanding habitat for these forest interior
species.

Among the many forest interior species that inhabit Fort
Meade are numerous species of forest interior dwelling birds that
require large tracts of forest for feeding and breeding. of the
19 species identified by the Maryland Forest, Park and Wildlife
Service as forest interior breeding birds native to this State,
18 are known to inhabit Fort Meade. In conjunction with research
at the adjacent Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, biologists of
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are studying these birds at
Fort Meade. Censuses of breeding birds conducted by staff of the
Research Center reveal that four forest interior birds are common
throughout Fort Meade. Eleven forest interior species were
reported from at least half of the stations censused. Several of
these birds feed and nest on or near the ground and are
vulnerable to predation and brood parasitism. These threats are
greatest near the edges of forests and in small patches of
forest.

All but one of the forest interior breeding birds that
inhabit Fort Meade require the habitat provided by an old forest.
Some of these species, such as the Pileated and Hairy
Woodpeckers, nest in the cavities of large old trees. The Red-
shouldered Hawk requires large trees to-support its big nest.

The Ovenbird nests on the ground and requires the well-developed
leaf litter of an old forest for its nest. Most of the forest
interior species require the well-developed canopy of an old
forest. The birds feed on insects that inhabit the canopy,
understory, and shrub layer. Ground-feeding birds consume
insects that inhabit the decaying logs of the old forest. Much
of the forest on Fort Meade is at least 60 years old. As the
forest ages it will provide increasingly higher quality habitat
for forest interior species.

OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE:

The old forests also provide excellent habitat for native
plants, including potential habitat for many rare species. The
decaying logs of the old forest return nutrients to the soil and
support soil fungi that enhance the nutrient and water absorption
of native vascular plants. Non-native, weedy plants thrive in
the increased sunlight and disturbed soil of forest edges and
young forests. These weedy plants outcompete native herbaceous
species. The forests of Fort Meade have not been surveyed for
rare plants, although one rare species is known to grow along the
Patuxent River. Twenty-six records of rare plants have been
historically reported from the adjacent Patuxent Wildlife
Research Center. These species may inhabit the similar upland
forests and wetlands of Fort Meade. More than 50 rare species of
plants have been reported historically from the Laurel area.
Aerial photographs and wetland maps indicate that the forests of
Fort Meade provide potential habitat for these rare species.

The older forests of Fort Meade also provide habitat for a
variety of wildlife in addition to the forest interior dwelling
birds. Six rare species of animals have been reported
historically from the Laurel area and may inhabit Fort Meade.
Two historical records of a rare fish, and records of 'a rare
snake and insect have been reported from the Fort. Flying
Squirrel and Eastern Gray Squirrel nest in the cavities of large,
old trees. Bobcat have been reported occasionally. Beaver,
geese, and a variety of ducks inhabit the swamps and marshes
along the Patuxent and Little Patuxent Rivers and their
tributaries. The populations of deer and fox are managed by
regulated hunting and trapping. The fields maintained on Fort
Meade offer feeding grounds for these game species.

The swamps of Fort Meade offer other unique biological
resources. A species of nematode controls the mosquito
population in the swamp along the Patuxent River. A Sycamore
over 4 ft. in diameter inhabits the swamp along the Little
Patuxent. In addition, the swamps and adjacent forested uplands
that drain into them filter sediment and other pollutants that
would otherwise flow downstream in the rivers.

Sites of historical significance, including old cemeteries,
school houses, and meeting houses, have been discovered on Fort
Meade.

THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS:

Threats

Clearing of the forests and drainage or filling of the
wetlands are the greatest threats to the forests of Fort Meade.
Clearing will further fragment the forests and reduce the
populations of forest interior species which are already
declining in this region. Many of these species require both
extensive, contiguous forest cover and the habitat provided by an
old forest. Clearing would also eliminate potential rare species
habitat. Silvicultural management of these forests reduces the
habitat quality for species of native plants, including many rare
species, and for some forest interior species of wildlife.

Change in the quantity or a decline in the quality of water
in the wetlands of Fort Meade will alter the composition of
vegetation and potentially destroy both the rare plants and the
unusual nematode that inhabit these wetlands. Loss of wetlands
would increase flooding downstream.

Management Needs

Large tracts of contiguous forest, both upland and
bottomland forest, should be designated as natural areas in which
forest will not be cleared and silvicultural management will not
be conducted. This will protect habitat for forest interior
species and maintain the suitability of the forests for
biological and ecological research. Any timber harvest or
clearing planned outside of these natural areas should be
conducted so that forest fragmentation is minimized. Broad
forested corridors should be maintained between clearings. Any
planned timber harvest or clearing should occur along the edges
of existing forest. The creation of clearings that form isolated
unforested patches or peninsulas surrounded by forest should be
avoided.

In order to protect the water quality of the Patuxent River,
maintain the vegetation composition of the wetland, and protect
important wildlife habitat, the floodplain of the Patuxent and
Little Patuxent Rivers should remain forested. Clearing of trees
should not occur in the floodplain or on the upland slopes that
drain into these rivers in order to avoid sedimentation and
pollution of the rivers. Activities planned upstream from Fort
Meade should be designed to eliminate potentially detrimental
effects on the water quality of the rivers and wetlands of Fort
Meade.

Surveys for rare species should be conducted at Fort Meade.
Protection area boundaries should be determined based upon the
results of these surveys, ongoing surveys of forest interior
breeding birds, and wildlife surveys.

BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS:

Further survey is needed to determine the protection
boundary for this site. The protection area will include large
contiguous tracts of forest along the Patuxent and Little
Patuxent Rivers plus large contiguous tracts of upland forest
south of Route 198.

SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY:

Bottomland Forests of Tulip Tree, Pin Oak, Sycamore, Sweet
Gum, and Red Maple border the Patuxent and Little Patuxent Rivers
in Fort Meade. Pin Oak and Sycamore are common in the swamps
near the rivers, while Tulip Tree and Sweet Gum are frequent in
the well-drained bottomlands. The shrub layer is extremely dense
in many areas near the rivers.

Beech and species of oak dominate the upland forests. Where
land was previously cultivated or cleared, pines are abundant.

A more complete description of the vegetation will be
prepared after future survey.

Railroad tracks border the Fort to the north and east.
Gravel pits occur on the Fort, primarily in the northern and
eastern portions of the property. Streams have been dammed to
create two lakes on the Fort. Most of the buildings and
clearings for military activities are located in the northern
portion of the property near Route 198. A number of clearings
also occur on Trainfire Road, which leads from the Little
Patuxent River south to the Patuxent River near the center of the
property. A large powerline crosses the Fort from the Baltimore-
Washington Parkway at the western edge of the property south and
east generally paralleling the Patuxent River. Numerous roads
cross Fort Meade. Patuxent River County Park borders the Fort to
the southeast and west along the river. Aside from this park and
nearby Federally-owned lands, most of the surrounding land has
been developed for residential and commercial purposes.

Prepared by: Katharine A. McCarthy

Date: December 1988

PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY

Protection Area Name: Freetown Swamp

County: Anne Arundel USGS Quad: Curtis Bay

SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE:

Excellent examples of two rare plant communities occur
within this protection area, a Red Maple-Sweet Bay Swamp and
Mature Pine-Oak Forest. Although some of the upland Pine-Oak
Forest was cleared within the last 50 years, a large stand of
mature pine remains. Pines of similar age are rare on the
Coastal Plain, and this pine barren community is particularly
unusual in this county. Vegetation studies of the Baltimore-
Washington, D.C. area conducted in the early 1900s indicated that
several Sweet Bay Bogs occurred in this region. Few, if any, of
these bogs survive; they have been cleared or drained. The Red
Maple-Sweet Bay Swamp in this protection area provides an example
that is similar although not identical, to the bogs found
historically.

Few plant species can endure the lack of available soil
nutrients in these sandy, well-drained uplands and in the highly
acidic' sphagnous swamp. Among the species that grow in this
stressful environment is a plant which is known from just three
sites in Maryland. This species inhabits the acidic swamp and
appears to thrive on the fresh water flowing through the adjacent
sandy ridges. Although rare throughout its range, this plant is
most frequently found in association with pine barren communities
similar to the forest in this protection area.

OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE:

A nature trail planned to traverse the swamp and adjacent
upland forest will provide naturalists and local residents an
opportunity to observe an unusual example of the native
vegetation of this region. A small nature center staffed during
the growing season would greatly increase the educational value
of the nature trail by providing further interpretation of the
local landscape.

THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS

Threats

Changes in local hydrology may eliminate the rare species.
This species occurs only in the wettest sections of the swamp.

Clearing of land near the swamp would encourage the
intrusion of non-native, weedy species that may exclude the rare
species. Also, clearing of the adjacent sandy ridges and along
feeder streams would promote soil erosion and the sedimentation
of the wetlands.

The rare species is an attractive wildflower that may be
destroyed by collectors.

Management Needs

Residential development plans for the surrounding uplands
should be designed to protect the hydrology of the swamp. once
these plans are implemented, the water level and water quality in
the swamp should be monitored in order to determine the success
of the water flow system. Data should be gathered prior to
development for comparison.

The maintenance of a forested buffer is essential if the
rare species is to survive. Clearing of the upland forest should
be minimal wherever possible. The encroachment of weedy species
should be monitored. Removal of these weedy plants may be
required.

Local residents should be informed of the significance of
the rare species population in order to generate interest and
concern for the protection area. Literature concerning the rare
species and unusual plant communities should be distributed to
residents of the future housing development. A committee of
local residents and biologists should be formed with the purpose
of safeguarding the rare species and plant communities. The
committee should actively monitor the protection area, develop
plans to correct problems identified through monitoring, and
implement these plans with the help of other local residents.

BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS:

The protection area includes the rare species wetland
habitat and adjacent forested uplands that drain into the
wetland. A 50 ft. forested buffer along feeder streams is
included to protect the water quality of the wetland.

SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY:

Sandy ridges border two small, perennial streams that
converge within this 47 acre protection area. Pitch Pine and
Virginia Pine dominate the overstory on the sandiest ridge, with
Vaccinium spp. and greenbrier the dominant shrubs. The stream in
the broader valley is bordered by a swamp of Red Maple, Tulip

Tree, and Sweet Pepperbush. In a narrower valley, the second
stream flows through a wetter, sphagnous swamp of Red Maple and
Sweet Bay bordered by the sandiest ridges. A variety of shrubs
inhabit this swamp. Bellwort is abundant on the sphagnum mats.
The well-drained, sandy ridges play an important role in
recharging the water table of this swamp.

A large population of Periwinkle marks an old house site
near the convergence of the streams. An old road is evident near
the house. These are the only visible artificial disturbances to
the swamp. Large stands of mature pines remain, but most of the
uplands were logged within the last 50 years. These areas are
dominated by oak and pine. Another old road crosses the uplands.
To the east and north are homes and businesses within 400 ft. of
the swamp.

Prepared by: Katharine A. McCarthy

Date: November 1988

PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY

Protection Area Name: Gumbottom Wetland

County: Anne Arundel USGS Quad: Round Bay

SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE:

This protection area contains a large, high-quality
freshwater wetland complex that includes several habitat types.
Many wetlands in the Coastal Plain of Maryland have been lost due
to ditching and draining for development or agriculture. Chief
in ecological significance among the habitats represented here is
a prime example of a mature Coastal Plain bog. The bog is more
than an acre in size with a springy, well-developed mat of
sphagnum. moss. Coastal Plain bogs support unusual botanical
communities adapted to this acidic habitat and influenced by the
high water table, relatively cool temperatures, and the sparse
cover of trees. Only five bogs are known from Maryland's Western
Shore, and these unique habitats warrant protection.

This bog may have originated as an oxbow of the stream that
runs through the site. Saturated conditions are maintained by
groundwater-influenced seeps on the slope above the bog and by a
very old road which bisects the site and has served as a dam for
many years.

The bog in Gumbottom Wetland is one of the most diverse and
botanically interesting bogs on the Western Shore. It
encompasses a broad array of bog shrubs and herbs, including at
least three carnivorous plants, a showy orchid, and eleven rare
species. One of the rare species is known nowhere else in
Maryland. Two others occur in only six additional sites in the
State. One of these is a shrub that is represented here by one
of its largest and most vigorous populations in the State.
Individual shrubs are large and form the dominant vegetation
throughout much of the bog. This species is also an important
component of the adjacent shrub swamp. one of the carnivorous
plant species occurs in only one other location on the Western
Shore and is rare throughout Maryland. The population at this
site is unusually large, with numerous plants in all stages of
maturity.

OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE:

In addition to its important botanical resources, Gumbottom
Wetland should be preserved for its scenic beauty, its role in
maintaining the water quality of the nearby river and the
Chesapeake Bay, and its importance as wildlife habitat.

The site was recommended for maintenance as a "natural use
area" in a 1970 report by the Maryland Department of State
Planning, entitled "Scenic Rivers in Maryland". The Severn
River, into which this wetland drains, was designated a Maryland
Scenic River in 1971. In 1988, the wetland was included in a
report entitled Gems of the Severn which recommended maintaining
the site in a natural state for such purposes as wetland and
forest wildlife reservations, scientific monitoring, and natural
management of stormwater. This report noted several additional
habitats at this site that are worthy of protection. A small
ravine downstream from the bog was noted for its scenic
qualities, including a rich herbaceous layer, open understory and
large Tulip Trees. The shrub swamp was reported as an example of
"alluvial drowning" and noted for the size and age of its trees,
which, along with several other factors, suggest that this
wetland has been in equilibrium (undisturbed) for an unusually
long time. Several large Sweet Bay trees were recommended for
measurement as potential State Champions.

The shrub swamp offers important feeding and nesting habitat
for migratory and resident birds and for amphibians. The large
size of the undeveloped area makes it a valuable habitat for
larger native animal species as well.

THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS:

Threats

Development pressure threatens this site, especially on the
uplands where forest cover is essential for protecting the
quality and quantity of water in the wetland below. All of the
rare species in the bog are dependent on the maintenance of the
groundwater table and of the natural chemical composition of the
water.

An increase in drainage from the wetland would threaten the
existence of the bog. Such a change in drainage could result
from dredging or widening the channel or culvert downstream from
the bog or from changes to the road that serves as a dam for the
bog. With greater drainage, trees would establish in the bog and
eventually eliminate the rare species.

A gravel mining operation upstream could allow runoff
containing sediment or pollutants to enter the stream below.
Runoff from roads is another potential problem, especially from
the road that bisects the wetland below the bog. When a
connecting road was constructed uphill, a sediment control slope
and rock-lined reservoir were constructed a short distance uphill
from the bog. This project involved the removal of a large swath
of trees and seems unnecessarily obtrusive. Both this clearing

and the road allows sunlight to penetrate the adjacent forest and
thus encourage the growth of non-native, weedy, sun-loving
species.

The crests of the steep slopes north of the bog are badly
eroded due to heavy foot-traffic and runoff from the adjacent
cleared recreational fields. The forest buffer appears to be
wide enough at present to absorb this runoff and sediment load
before it reaches the wetland. If this forest buffer were
removed or narrowed, sediment reaching the bog would be extremely
detrimental to the rare species and could destroy the bog.

North of the bog, trash dumped near the base of the slopes
interferes the scenic qualities of the area and may pollute the
wetland.

The sphagnum mat and rare species growing on it are
vulnerable to compaction and trampling. Several of the rare
species are attractive plants that might be collected by
unscrupulous or uninformed wildflower enthusiasts. One species
is a showy perennial plant that takes several years to reach
reproductive maturity. This population is small and particularly
vulnerable.

Management Needs

I
- is critical that an effective forest buffer be maintained
4L.
to protect the hydrology of the rare species habitat and prevent
the encroachment of non-native, weedy species. Within the
protection area no clearing or forest cutting should be allowed.
It is likely that development will occur on the more distant
parts of the watershed above the wetland, but cooperation should
be sought with developers to minimize the clearing of steep
slopes and other activities deleterious to water quantity and
quality in the watershed.

Outflow from the gravel mining operation should be monitored
to insure that runoff does not impair the quality of the water in
the stream.

No dredging, widening, or draining should be permitted on
the stream below the bog. The road should not be widened or
altered in a way that would affect the hydrology of the wetland.

Erosion should be monitored on the steep slopes, and
installation of erosion control devices may be recommended in the
future.

A cooperative effort with local citizens should be
undertaken, perhaps through the local county park, to clean up
the trash along the slopes near the park.

Because of the delicate nature of the bog habitat and its
associated plant species, the location of the bog should be
revealed only to those who are involved in protecting the site.
Visitors should observe the bog from its edges, rather than
walking onto, and thus compacting, the sphagnum mat. If
developments such as walking trails or a nature center are
contemplated, they should be focused on less fragile areas such
as the scenic ravine south of the road, or-the shrub swamp. A
nature trail could be developed on an existing old road and
trails south of the shrub swamp, perhaps with a boardwalk
extension into the shrub swamp where the important ecological
role of wetlands could be illustrated.

BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS:

The protection area boundary contains the wetland complex,
including the rare species habitat, and a forested buffer. The
forested buffer near the bog and shrub swamp extends to the crest
of the hills on each side of the wetland. Upstream, the buffer
extends approximately 150 ft. on each side of the stream.
Downstream from the shrub swamp, the boundary includes the buffer
along the stream to ensure maintenance of the hydrology of the
wetland. The buffer extends to the edge of the Critical Area,
which contains important natural habitats near this stream, but
which is outside the scope of this report. The buffer is
approximately 300 ft. in width near the road and 100 ft.
downstream.

SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY:

At the downstream (eastern) end of this 161 acre protection
area is a floodplain forest dominated by Red Maple, Skunk
Cabbage, and Cinnamon Fern. The road above the floodplain forest
functions as a dam, maintaining the inundated state of the
wetlands upstream. A vast Red Maple swamp extends approximately
2000 feet upstream. The maples grow on hummocks dominated by
Tussock Sedge. Southern Pond Lily grows in the water channels
between hummocks. The adjacent woods south of the swamp are
dominated by oaks with American Holly and Highbush Blueberry in
the understory.

on the northern side of the swamp near the road is an
elevated bog with a thick mat of sphagnum moss upon which grows a
diverse array of typical bog species, most of them rare in
Maryland. In the open areas lacking shrubs two carnivorous
species grow, one of them abundantly. Also found in the open bog
are several rare sedges. Both dominant shrubs are rare species,
,one of which is very abundant and extends into the edge of the
maple swamp. occasional small Red Maples and Smooth Alders are
found at the edges of the bog. In the open water channels

running through the bog Southern Pond Lily grows abundantly.
Small pools contain several species of bladderworts. The lower
slopes of the adjacent forest exhibit the hydric soils of
groundwater-influenced seeps. Hardwood swamp species such as
Sweet Bay and Black Gum predominate, with a luxurious herbaceous
layer of Cinnamon Fern, Netted Chain Fern, and club moss. Higher
up the slopes are dominated by species of drier habitats such as
Chestnut Oak and White Oak, with young Sassafras, Red Maples, and
oaks in the understory. The upper slopes are bare in some
places, and are crossed by with numerous highly eroded*trails.
Just above the slopes are the level, cleared ballfields and
playground of a county park.

Upstream from the marsh the natural area narrows to a small
strip of land along the stream as the stream near a mining
operation. Farther upstream the stream is composed of two
branchesf both forested. Vegetional surveys have not yet been
conducted in this area.

Prepared by: Judith L. Robertson

Date: November 1988

PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY

Protection Area Name: John Wesley Church

County: Anne Arundel USGS Quad: Round Bay

SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE:

John Wesley Church Protection Area contains an unusually
high quality wooded swamp bounded by forested, steep slopes.
Swamp forests of this size and maturity are rare due to draining
and filling for agriculture, development, and logging. The high
.quality of the water in the swamp and stream is maintained by the
forested slopes. The development which has occurred in the area
is limited to the more level uplands, well away from the
wetlands. The vegetation in this protection area is very diverse
due to the lack of recent disturbance and the gradual changes in
soil moisture with distance upstream.

A rare species grows among the diverse herbaceous species on
the wooded slopes. This species is known from just four other
sites in Maryland and only one of these sites is protected. This
population is unusual in that its habitat is drier than at any
other site in the state. The plants that grow here may provide
an important source of genetic variation in their ability to
tolerate drier soil.

OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE:

The wooded swamp provides superb nesting and feeding habitat
for migratory songbirds, shorebirds, and waterfowl. Preservation
of this site is also critical to the maintenance of water quality
in the marsh downstream at Arlington Echo Outdoor Center. The
1970 report "Scenic Rivers in Maryland" recommended this site as
a "natural use area". It was also recommended in 1986 as one of
the "Natural Areas of Highest Priority for Preservation". Gems
of the Severn (1988) recommends the preservation of this site for
passive recreation, a wildlife reservation, and possible
extension of Arlington Echo Outdoor Center. Waters from this
swamp forest feed into the Severn River, designated in 1970 as
one of Maryland's Scenic Rivers. Non-tidal wetlands such as this
are increasingly valued for their role in protecting the water
quality of the rivers they feed and ultimately, the Chesapeake
Bay.

THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS:

Threats

The major threats to this site are potential development of
the uplands and clearing of the forested slopes. Logging or
clearing may cause sedimentation and changes in hydrology that
would be detrimental to the rare species and other native
vegetation in the wetland. opening of the forest canopy would
also be detrimental because it would allow invasion of the forest
by non-native weedy species that compete with native species.
Erosion due to overuse of the area is another potential problem.
Some trails in the area are already beginning to show signs of
erosion damage.

Management Needs

No logging or clearing of the steep slopes above the wetland
should be conducted. Private landowners should be encouraged to
leave their forested slopes intact to protect the rare species
habitat and the wetland. Any further construction should be
limited to the level uplands. Any construction generating runoff
into the site should be designed to protect the quality and
quantity of water entering the wetland.

Trails should be maintained in order to reduce erosion
damage. Signs may be needed to encourage visitors to remain on
the trails.

BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS:

The protection area boundary includes the swamp forest, the
rare species habitat, and a forested buffer. Where possible, the
forested buffer extends up to 100 ft. beyond the top of the steep
slope in order to protect the forested slopes from the impacts of
upland development.

SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY:

John Wesley Church Protection Area is a 97 acre site
containing a small stream, a hardwood swamp forest, and steep
forested slopes. The stream flows northeast toward the Severn
River. The swamp forest is dominated by small Red Maples and
Sweet Bay. The dense shrub layer contains Sweet Pepperbush, High
Bush Blueberry, and greenbrier, and is virtually impenetrable in
some sections. Included in the diverse herbaceous layer are
Skunk Cabbage, club mosses, Cinnamon Fern, and Royal Fern.
Several small, sphagnous seeps in the narrow upstream portion of

the swamp contain Bladder Sedge, other sedges and grasses, Netted
Chain Fern, and Halberd-leaved Tearthumb.

Both sides of the swamp are bordered by steep slopes with
much drier soils. The slopes are dominated by hickories and
mixed oaks, especially Chestnut Oak, White Oak, and Black Oak.
American Holly and Flowering Dogwood dominate the understory,
which is quite sparse in some areas. The slope also contains a
diverse ground-layer including ladies'-slipper orchids, Trailing
Arbutus, and several species of club mosses. A large ravine on
the west side of the site is dominated by mature White and
Chestnut Oaks, and contains a thick shrub layer of Mountain
Laurel. This ravine also contains the rare species. An
abandoned outbuilding is located near the head of the side
ravine.

Portions of the site were probably logged 40-50 years ago.
One section near Arlington Echo Outdoor Center shows evidence of
a burn perhaps 10-20 years ago.

Prepared by: Judith L. Robertson

Date: November 1988

PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY

Protection Area Name: North Gray's Bog

County: Anne Arundel USGS Quad: Gibson Island

SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE:

This protection area contains a wetland complex including a
large Coastal Plain bog, an old pond, an emergent marsh, and a
shrub swamp. Coastal Plain bogs are an extremely unusual habitat
type in Maryland which contain rare botanical communities tha't
should be preserved. Only five other bogs are known from the
Western Shore, all of them ecologically important. Such sites
support a suite of species found only in acidic, wet habitats
where tree canopy closure is inhibited and a mat of organic peat
has developed over many years.

North Gray's Bog harbors sizeable populations of five rare
plant species, two of which occur at only six other sites in the
state. This site is especially important because portions of the
bog are in the early stages of development, with the potential
habitat for rare species increasing in size as the development of
the sphagnous mat continues.

OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE:

Additional rare species are likely to be discovered when
this site is surveyed at different times of the year when other
species become identifiable.

Wetland complexes such as this one are increasingly
recognized for their essential role in -maintaining the water
quality of our rivers and the Chesapeake Bay. Many such wetlands
have been lost due to filling, draining and ditching for
development and agriculture.

THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS:

Threats

Although the development of the nearby uplands incorporated
measures to protect the wetlands, clearing of adjacent uplands on
private land is still a potential threat. Clearing of the
adjacent upland forest would endanger the quality and quantity of
water necessary to maintain this unique wetland. The forested
uplands capture the precipitation required to maintain the
groundwater level of the wetland.

Clearing of the uplands would also produce the potential for
runoff of pesticides and fertilizers from lawns. This potential
is currently greatest near the pond, where the land has already
been cleared up to the edge of the wetland. one of the most
significant rare species grows primarily at the edge of the pond,
and mowing by homeowners has destroyed part of this population.

Clearing of forest cover near the wetland also increases the
likelihood of invasion by non-native, weedy species that thrive
under increased sunlight following canopy removal. These weedy
species often outcompete important native species.

Finally, the encroachment of woody species may eliminate the
rare herbaceous species from portions of the bog.

Management Needs

A forested upland buffer should be maintained around the
wetland to limit the potential for runoff of pollutants,
depletion of the groundwater table, and invasion by weedy
species. Landowners near the pond should be encouraged to
restrict their use of pesticides, fertilizers or other chemicals
near the pond. If possible, they should be encouraged to
increase the size of the wooded buffer between their lawns and
the wetland.

The development of the sphagnum mat in the old pond and the
encroachment of tree species into the shrub bog upstream should
be monitored. Because suitable sites for transient communities
such as the shrub bog are becoming so limited in number, human
intervention to prevent the establishment of trees may be needed.
It may be necessary to remove the trees by hand in order to
maintain the rare species habitat.

BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS:

The protection area boundary contains the wetland complex,
including the rare species habitat, and a forested buffer
required to maintain the water quality and vegetation composition
of the habitat. The recommended buffer includes forested
portions of adjacent parcels. It avoids houses and lawns, except
for small portions of a few lawns that have been mowed to the
edge of the wetland or near rare species populations.

SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY:

The downstream portion of this So acre site consists of an
old pond maintained by a dirt road that functions as a dam.
White Water Lily floats on the open water, and a sphagnum mat is

developing on the northwest side of the pond. Yelloweyed-grass,
the carnivorous Spatulate Leaved Sundew, several rushes and
sedges, and three rare species all grow in this developing bog.
A fourth rare species occurs on drier land immediately adjacent
to the pond under a canopy of pine, oak, and Sweet Bay, and along
the narrow weedy strip of land on the bank of the roadside dam.

Upstream, a large, emergent marsh is carpeted with Three-way
Sedge, Marsh St. John's-Wort, yellow-eyed grass and a showy rare
sedge. Numerous hardwood stumps protrude from the marsh,
indicating that the marsh formed recently.
The bog complex is best developed in a 300 ft. 2 area just
west of the marsh where the sphagnum mat is thickest and
virtually all plants are acid-loving bog species. To the north
the bog borders a Red Maple-Sweet Bay-Swamp Loosestrife shrub
swamp with -scattered patches of predominantly bog vegetation.
One large hummock is dominated by a rare species. Proceeding
upland, the Red Maple and Sweet Bay become increasingly taller,
and bog species diminish in abundance. The wetland is surrounded
by mesic, forested slopes dominated by oaks and Pitch Pine.

Along the southeast shore of the wetland are large but
scattered patches of Cinnamon Fern, Swamp Loosestrife, and
Virginia Willow. Several species of carnivorous bladderwort
occur in the shallow water along the wetland edge.

Prepared by: Judith L. Robertson

Date: November 1988

PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY

Protection Area Name: Patuxent Maple Swamp

County: Anne Arundel, Prince Georges USGS Quad: Bowie

SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE:

This Red Maple Bottomland Forest is an excellent example of
a palustrine floodplain forest. Occasional scouring by
floodwater of the Patuxent River maintains.an open understory.
Patches of shrubs occur on slightly elevated areas and herbaceous
openings form in the depressions and channels that retain
floodwaters longer. These natural herbaceous openings are unique
to floodplain forests; they do not occur in other palustrine,
non-tidal wetlands of the Upper Coastal Plain. Among the unusual
herbaceous species that inhabit these openings are two species
that are rare in Maryland. one species is known from just two
other sites in the State. This is the only known population in
Maryland of the other rare species.

At the west end of the protection area, temporary pools in
the Red Maple-Sweet Gum Forest provide habitat for a rare
crustacean.

OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE:

The various types of forested wetlands along this section of
the Patuxent River provide excellent habitat for resident and
migratory songbirds. In addition, several woodpeckers were
observed during both visits to this area.

The natural herbaceous openings attract deer and other
wildlife.

The forested wetlands along the Patuxent River absorb
floodwater during storms and thus reduce the impacts of flooding
downstream.

THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS:

Threats

Regular flooding of this forest is essential to maintain the
herbaceous openings inhabited by the rare species. Activities
that reduce or eliminate flooding will eliminate the populations
of rare species.

Clearing of trees within the swamp forest or on the adjacent
uplands would promote the growth of non-native weedy vegetation
to the exclusion of the rare species.

A decline in water quality of the Patuxent River upstream
from the protection area may be detrimental to the rare species.

Management Needs

Proposals for the clearing or development of land within the
watershed upstream should be reviewed for potential effects on
the quality and quantity of water in this section of the Patuxent
River.

Logging or clearing of the forest should not occur within
the protection area.

If nature trails are constructed they should be routed to
avoid the non-tidal wetlands.

The rare herbaceous species as well as the weedy, non-native
species (particularly Moneywort) should be monitored to determine
their reproductive success. It may be necessary to remove
Moneywort by hand if this species encroaches on the populations
of rare species.

Further survey is needed to determine the extent of the rare
species populations.

BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS:

The protection area boundary includes the rare species
habitat, adjacent wetlands and potential habitat, and a forested
buffer required to maintain the population of rare species.

SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY:

Although Red Maple dominates this section of the Patuxent
River floodplain, a variety of bottomland hardwood species
inhabit this 47 acre wetland, including Sweet Gum, River Birch,
Sycamore, Ironwood, and ash. Spicebush and arrow-wood dominate
the shrub canopy. Lizard's Tail, False Nettle, and knotweed are
the most abundant herbaceous species.

Deposits of silt on the leaves of shrubs and herbs indicate
that the wetland is flooded in at least one foot of water during
and shortly after periods of heavy rain.

Gravel was mined from the uplands on both sides of the
Patuxent. The western section of the protection area includes a

large, shallow pit that is now covered by herbaceous vegetation,
predominantly Water Purslane.

The forested buffer includes previously cleared land that is
reverting to Virginia Pine. In addition, a forested wetland of
Sweet Gum and Red Maple occurs in the western portion of the
protection area.

Prepared by: Katharine A. McCarthy

Date: November 1988

PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY

Protection Area Name: Patuxent Wildlife Research Center

County: Anne Arundel, Prince Georges USGS Quad: Laurel

SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE:

The Research Center includes over 3000 acres of nearly
contiguous forest. A large portion of this forest (probably more
than one third of the area) is mature upland forest.
Approximately 700 acres of mature bottomland forest border the
Patuxent River within the Research Center. These forests in
association with adjacent forests on Fort Meade, the U.S.
Department of Agriculture Research Center, and other federally-
owned lands, constitute one of the largest remaining contiguous
tracts of forest in the Baltimore-Washington metropolitan area.
As commercial and residential development merge formerly distinct
metropolitan areas of the mid-Atlantic states, the forests that
remain are usually small, isolated patches. These small patches
cannot support many of the plants and animals native to this
region that require extensive forests or are intolerant of
frequent disturbance. The forests of the Wildlife Reseai@ch
Center and adjacent Federal properties offer the best available
opportunity to conserve the native plants and wildlife of this
region that will not survive in small, isolated forests.

Approximately 3000 acres of forest at the Wildlife Research
Center are designated as Research Natural Areas by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. The Society of American Foresters
identified the Research Center's bottomland forest as one of
nearly 400 natural areas in their national inventory of mature
forests. The Society's inventory of natural areas was initiated
because these relatively undisturbed forests provide a vital
educational resource. The extensive tracts of forest provide a
laboratory for studies of plants and animals in their natural
habitats and for studies of the ecological processes that sustain
the forests. The forest ecosystems remain essentially intact;
for example, they include species of forest interior dwelling
birds such as neotropical migratory species that are unable to
survive in smaller forests. At least one rare plant species
inhabits this area. Only by understanding the natural processes
that sustain these extensive, relatively undisturbed forests, can
scientists assess the effects of human-induced changes to forests
of this region.

OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE:

There are several historical reports of rare species at the
Wildlife Research Center. The forests were not searched for
these species during the field surveys conducted for this report.
However, it is likely that the rare species survive because there
has been very little disturbance to the habitats from which they
were reported. Further survey of the forest is needed to confirm
the presence of these rare species.

THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS:

Threats

Fragmentation of the forests is the greatest threat to the
forested complex of Federal lands that includes the wildlife
Research Center. Residential and commercial development
surrounds the forests. There will be continual pressure to
expand the roads that cross through the forests and to build new
roads. The expansion of the two lane roads would reduce the
habitat quality of the forests for species such as forest
interior dwelling birds that require extensive, contiguous
forest. In addition, the wider road would create a greater
barrier to the movement of wildlife through the Wildlife Research
Center.

Forest edges along roadsides and other clearings provide
habitat for species of plants and wildlife that exclude the
forest interior species. For exanple, many forest interior
dwelling birds are neotropical migrants that nest on or near the
ground and usually produce just one brood per year. Near forest
edges, these forest interior birds are highly vulnerable to nest
predation and brood parasitism by cowbirds and other species that
inhabit the forest edges. Non-native weedy plants establish
along the sunny forest edges and invade the forest interior. The
shade-loving forest interior plants are gradually excluded by
these weedy species. These changes created by fragmentation of
the forest substantially reduce the value of the forest as a
laboratory to study natural ecological processes. The ecosystem
loses important components as these changes occur, and the
natural processes are altered.

A decline in the water quality or change in the stream flow
of the Patuxent River may alter the vegetation composition of the
mature bottomland forest.

Management Needs

Existing roads should not be expanded and new roads should
not be constructed in the Wildlife Research Center.

The clearing of forested land within the protection area
should be prohibited. Trees should not be cut within the
protection area unless necessary for safety along existing
trails.

Activities planned upstream from the protection area that
would reduce water quality or alter drainage patterns should be
reviewed for potential effects on the bottomland forest that
borders the Patuxent River. Plans should be modified to prevent
sedimentation, pollution, and hydrological changes in the
bottomland forest.

BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS:

The protection area includes the mature bottomland forest,
adjacent immature stands of bottomland forest, and adjacent
upland forest that is undeveloped and is not actively managed for
research. The area extends to Fort George G. Meade to the north
and northeast and to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Research
Center to the south and east.

SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY:

The 3000 acre protection area includes bottomland forest of
Beech, Pin Oak, Tulip Tree, and Sweet Gum, and upland forests of
oaks, Beech, and pine. The Patuxent River flows through well-
drained bottomland forest dominated by Beech and swamp forest
dominated by Pin Oak. Sweet Gum, Tulip Tree, and Red Maple are
frequent in both types of forest. The well-drained bottonland
forest supports a more diverse herbaceous layer that includes
many spring wildflowers. The shrub layer of the well-drained
bottomland forest is also better developed; Spicebush, Poison
Ivy, and Black Haw are dominant.

Beech and White Oak dominate the uplands adjacent to the
bottomland forest. Where land was previously cultivated,
Virginia Pine And Pitch Pine are often abundant. In areas of
sandy soil, Southern Red Oak and other oaks are mixed with the
pines and the understory is sparse. The undisturbed upland
forest south of Route 197 is dominated by oaks.

Prepared by: Katharine A. McCarthy

Date: December 1988

PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY

Protection Area: Shady Pond

COUNTY: Anne Arundel USGS Quad: Gibson Island

SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE:

Shady Pond is a one acre permanent freshwater pond which
empties via a short stream into tidal waters. The water in Shady
Pond is of unusually high quality. This is probably due to the
relatively undisturbed nature of the wooded stream that feeds the
pond.

The pond is surrounded by a rare plant species which is
known from only six other locations in the state. None of these
sites is well protected.

OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE:

The marshy areas on the pond edge and the mesic streambanks
may support additional rare species which were not identifiable
at the time of the recent survey. Permanent freshwater ponds
such as this one provide important feeding and breeding habitat
for amphibians and water-dependent species of birds.

THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS:

Threats

Clearing of the land around the pond would destroy the rare
plants that grow along the edge of the pond. on the southwest
side, land has been cleared close to the pond, creating the
potential for pollution of the pond if pesticides, fertilizers,
or animal wastes are allowed to run off into the pond. The open
canopy in this region is allowing the invasion of non-native,
weedy species which compete with native plants, including the
rare species. Additionally, disturbance of the stream that feeds
the pond or of the woods surrounding the feeder stream could
lower the water quality in the pond by increasing sedimentation
or pollution.

Management Needs

A forested buffer should be maintained around the pond to
protect the rare species. Within this protected area, vegetation
should not be removed or altered. The mesic woods along the
stream should remain undisturbed.

Landowners should be informed of the presence of the rare
species. These owners should be encouraged to let the cleared
area adjacent to the pond grow back and to avoid any activities
near the pond that might cause pollutants to enter it.

BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS:

The protection area boundary includes the rare species
habitat, a forested buffer around the pond, and a forested buffer
along the stream. A buffer of 75 feet is recommended on the
northwest and southwest sides of the pond, excluding residential
lawns. A wider buffer (150 ft.) is proposed on the east side of
the pond where the stream enters. Marshy areas providing
potential rare species habitat are better developed on this side
of the pond.

The forested buffer extends approximately 150 - 200 ft. to a
nearby road on the south side of the stream. on the north side
of the stream a 50 ft. buffer protects the quality of the stream
and excludes houses nearby.

SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY:

Shady Pond is a shallow, acidic, freshwater pond of high
water quality. This 13 acre site was used at one time for
cranberry farming and the adjustable overflow gate is still
present where the pond drains to the southwest, although it has
not been used recently. The mesic forests north of the pond and
along the stream are dominated by Red Maple and blueberry. A
rare species occurs around the entire perimeter of the pond.
Marshy areas on the eastern edge of the pond are dominated by
Brown-fruited Rush as well as other rushes, sedges, and sphagnum
moss. A small dirt road borders the pond on the southeast side
and residential lawns extend close to the pond on the southwest.

Prepared by: Judith L. Robertson

Date: December 1988

PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY

Protection Area Name: Stony Run

County: Anne Arundel USGS Quad: Relay

SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE:

The Pitch Pine-Red Maple Swamp Forest that borders Stony Run
is a rare community on the Upper Coastal Plain. Several of the
herbaceous species in the swamp usually inhabit colder regions in
the mountains or in the Piedmont further north. Forests as
mature as the swamp along Stony Run are rare throughout the
Coastal Plain. The well-stratified canopy and the presence of
large trees (pines greater than 15 in. in diameter) indicate that
portions of this protection area have not been logged in more
than 60 years. A colorful display of native wildflowers blankets
the forest in the spring and summer. The absence of non-native
species throughout much of the swamp is probably a result of
minimal recent disturbance to this area.

Five rare plant species grow in the well-developed
herbaceous layer of the swamp forest. One of these plants is
known from just three other sites in Maryland and is rare
throughout its range. Portions of two of the sites for this
species are protected voluntarily by landowners, but these
voluntary agreements do not offer long-term protection for these
sites. This population is the only recent siting of one of the
rare plants in Maryland. Two of the other rare species are known
from fewer than ten sites in the State. This relatively mature
swamp forest provides opportunity to preserve these rare species
as well as a rare community.

OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE:

The Stony Run Protection Area is adjacent to a State Park
and offers an excellent opportunity to increase the diversity of
habitats within the park. Whether this swamp forest is annexed
to the park or protected as a separate entity, it will enhance
the recreational and educational values of the park by providing
an unu sual habitat for visitors to explore.

A sixth rare plant species has been reported from this area
but has not been observed recently. Because there has been
little disturbance to portions of the habitat, further survey may
reveal that this species still inhabits the swamp forest.

THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS:

Threats

Logging, selective cutting, or clearing of the forest would
eliminate the rare species and the rare community. Most of the
surrounding land has been cleared for development, and there will
be continual pressure to clear this forest. The rare species
require the well-developed, organic soil and high water quality
of a mature, undisturbed forest.

An increase or decline in the quantity of water that drains
into this swamp may destroy the rare species. The plants require
saturated soil for part of the year but do not tolerate long
periods of flooding. A decrease in the water quality of the
swamp may also be detrimental to the rare species.

One of the rare species is a showy wildflower that is
vulnerable to casual collection and to deliberate collection by
wildflower gardeners and naturalists.

Management Needs:

Logging, clearing, and selective cutting of trees should not
occur within the protection area.

Activities that would change the quantity or reduce the
quality of water in the swamp forest should not be permitted.
Activities that would alter stream flow or reduce water quality
in Stony Run upstream from the protection area should be reviewed
for potential effects on the rare species habitat; any plans for
such activities should be designed to eliminate impacts on the
swamp forest.

The exact locations of the rare species should be revealed
only to individuals who require the information in order to
protect the species. If the land is annexed to the State Park,
signs should be posted to request that visitors refrain from
picking flowers and collecting plants.

BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS:

The protection area includes the rare species' wetland
habitat, adjacent wetlands, and adjacent uplands that drain into
these wetlands in order to protect the quality and quantity of
water in the wetlands. The forested upland buffer also reduces
the potential for intrusion by non-native, weedy species.
Railroad tracks delimit the eastern boundary of the protection
area.

SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY:

Within this 165 acre protection area is a large swamp forest
dominated by Loblolly Pine and Red Maple. Tulip Tree and Sweet
Bay form a subcanopy. Southern Arrowwood and Sweet Pepperbush
are abundant and grow on hummocks of sphagnum. in the wettest
portions of the swamp. Skunk Cabbage dominates the herbaceous
layer on these hummocks. other herbaceous species include plants
more commonly found in colder regions, such as Canada Mayflower,
White Hellebore, and Wood Anemone. Turk's-cap Lily is common in
some areas and its flowers create an impressive display in mid-
summer.

Residential and commercial development nearly surround the
protection area. Railroad tracks and a highway border the
protection area to the east. An airport lies beyond the highway.
Trees have been cleared within the protection area along a runway
approach to the airport. To the west are an industrial park and
residences. A road crosses Stony Run through the narrowest
section of the protection area. To the north is a State Park.

Prepared by: Katharine A. McCarthy

Date: December 1988

PROTECTION AREA SUMMARY

Protection Area Name: Watershed Woods

County: Anne Arundel USGS Quad: South River

SUMMARY OF ECOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE:

Beech and species of oak dominate this mature deciduous
forest. Trees measuring greater than two feet in diameter
inhabit the uplands and ravine. Forests of similar age are
extremely rare on the Upper Coastal Plain of Maryland. The
absence of disturbance to this forest allowed the development of'
rich, loamy soil that supports an abundance and diversity of
herbaceous species.

Among the numerous spring wildflowers is a species that
occurs in just one other site in the State. It appears that this
rare plant species relies on a soil fungus in order to absorb
water and nutrients. However, the fungus only grows in well
developed, undisturbed, loamy soils. The rarity of this plant
species, with its associated fungus, is attributed to the
scarcity of mature, undisturbed forests on the Upper Coastal
Plain.

OTHER VALUES AND SIGNIFICANCE:

The mature hardwood forest and adjacent swamp offer a
diversity of habitats to wildlife, including numerous songbirds.
The adjacent ponds provide feeding and resting grounds for
waterbirds and waterfowl.

THREATS AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS:

Threats

Due to the rare plant's association with soil fungi, any
disturbance that dries or compacts the soil may eliminate the
rare species. Such disturbances include the removal of trees,
the use of machinery, and trampling.

Trails around the impoundments of two streams are bordered
by non-native species. These weedy species also invade openings
in the upland forest created by fallen trees. If left unchecked,
the populations of non-native species may exclude the rare
species.

Management Needs

Within the protection area, any activity that would disturb
or compact the soil or alter the current drainage within the
ravine should be reviewed for potential effects on the rare
species. Logging or clearing of forest should not occur within
the protection area. It is likely that even selective cutting of
trees near the rare plants would eliminate the population.

This rare species does not produce vegetative growth above
ground every year. However, stems of the plants survive in the
soil year-round. These underground stems are also very sensitive
to soil disturbance. It is important that the land managers are
aware of the location of the plant population so they may avoid
the population, even when the plants are not visible, if any
activities are planned within the protection area.

The populations of the non-native species and the rare
species should be monitored to determine their size and
reproductive success.

BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONS:

The protection area boundary includes the rare species'
habitat and a buffer of forested slopes required to maintain the
population of rare plants.

SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY:

Several intermittent and perennial streams dissect this 54
acre deciduous forest. The upper slopes are dominated by oaks
and Beech with occasional Virginia Pine. Mountain Laurel and
Vaccinium sp. are the dominant shrubs in the uplands. Tulip Tree
and Spicebush are common on the lower slopes of the ravines.
There is very little herbaceous cover on the uplands, possibly a
result of both deer browse and soil conditions. The lower slopes
of the ravines support a diverse herbaceous cover dominated by
May-apple. Black Snakeroot, Bloodroot, and Showy Orchis also
grow near the base of the ravines. The rare species occurs on
the moist, lower slope of a ravine among many other herbaceous
species.

The protection area is bordered by a highway to the south
and by housing developments in all other directions.

Prepared by: Katharine A. McCarthy

Date: November 1988

REFERENCES

The following general references are provided as background
material and suggested reading to supplement this report.

Bartgis, R.L. 1986. Functional assessment of non-tidal
wetlands. Natural Heritage Program, Maryland Department of
Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD. Unpublished report to
Coastal Resources Division.

Buckman, R.E. and R.L. Quintus. 1972. Natural areas of the Soc.
of American Foresters. Soc. of American Foresters,
Washington, D.C. 38 pp.

Bushman, E.S. and G.D. Therres. 1988. Habitat management
guidelines for forest interior breeding birds. Wildlife
Tech. Publ. 88-1. Maryland Department of Natural
Resources, Annapolis, MD. 50 pp.

Davison 'A.T. and C.G. Rucker. 1988. Gems of the Severn. The
Severn River Commission, City of Annapolis, Anne Arundel
County, Annapolis, MD. 346 pp.

Fernald, M.L. 1970. Gray's manual of botany. Eighth ed.,
corrected printing. D. Van Nostrand Co., New York. 1632
pp-

Glaser, J.D. 1968. Coastal Plain geology of Southern Maryland.
Guidebook No. 1. Maryland Geologic Survey, Baltimore, MD.
56 pp.

Gleason, H.A. 1952. The new Britton and Brown illustrated flora
of the northeastern United States and Canada. Vols. 1-3.
Hafner Press, New York. 1732 pp.

Godrey, R.K. and J.W. Wooten. 1979. Aquatic and wetland plants
of the southeastern United States, Monocotyledons. Univ. of
Georgia Press, Athens, GA. 712 pp.

- . 1981. Aquatic and wetland plants of the
southeastern United States, Dicotyledons. Univ. of Georgia
Press, Athens, GA. 933 pp.

Norden, A.W., D.C. Forester, and G.H. Fenwick, eds. 1984.
Threatened and endangered plants of Maryland. Natural
Heritage Program Spec. Publ. 84-1. Maryland Department of
Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD. 473 pp.

Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the
vascular flora of the Carolinas. Univ. of North Carolina
Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 1183 pp.

Sipple, W.s. 1977. Revised tentative floras of fire Anne
Arundel County bogs. Wetlands Permit Section, Water
Resources Administration, Maryland Department of Natural
Resources, Annapolis, MD. 7 pp.

Tiner, R.W. Jr. 1988. Field guide to nontidal wetland
identification. Maryland Department of Natural Resources,
Annapolis, MD and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Newton
Corner, MA; Cooperative Publication. 283 pp. + plates.

U.S. Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey. U.S. Govt.
Printing Office, Washington, DC. (available for each
Maryland county).

Whitcomb, R.F. 1977. Island biogeography and "habitat islands"
of eastern forest. American birds 31:1, pp. 3-23, 91-93.

et al. 1981. Effects of forest fragmentation on
avifauna of the eastern deciduous forest. Vol 41: 125-292
in Forest island dynamics in man-dominated landscapes. R.L.
Burgess and D.M. Sharpe, eds. Springer-Verlag, New York.

APPE NDIX A
Final Action On Regulations 1471

For information concerning Final Action on Regulations, see inside fro nt cover.

Symbol Key
Roman type indicates text already existing at the time of the proposed action. Italic @ype indicates new text added at the time of
proposed action. A single undeflin indicates text added at the time of final action. [Single brackets] indicate deleted text.
[Double brackets] ] indicate text deleted at the time of final action.

14:6 Md. R. 719 - 726 (March 13, 1987), have been adopted
Title 07 as proposed. -
DEPARTIRVAIENT OF Effective Date: June 29, 1987.
TORREY C. BROWN, M.D.
HUMAN RESOURCES Secretary of Natural Resources

Subtitle 03 INCOME MAINTENANCE
ADMINISTRATION
07.03.05 General Public Assistance to Em- Subtitle 05 WATER RESOURCES
ployables ADMINISTRATION
Authority: Article 88A. ��17.17A.1 - 17A.3,65B. 08.05.03 Construction on Non-Tidal Waters
Annotated Code of Maryland and Floodplains
Notice of Final Action Authority: Natural Resources Article, 08-801 - 8-814,
187-110-F) Annotated Code of Maryland
On May 26, 1987, the Secretary of Human Resources Notice of Final Action
adopted amendments to Regulations .09 and .11 under 167-060-F]
COMAR. 07.03.05 General Public Assistance to Employ-
ables. These amendments, which were proposed for adop- On June 9, 1987, amendments to Regulation .03 under
tion in 14:8 Md. R. 941 (April 10, 1987), have been adopted CONIAR 08.05.03 Construction on Non-Tidal Waters
as proposed. (DHR Transmittal Number 87-12) and Floodplains, were adopted by the Secretary of Natu-
Effective Date: June 29, 1987. ral Resources. These amendments, which were proposed for
adoption in 14:6 Md. R. 726 - 728 (March 13, 1987), have
RUTH MASSINGA been adopted with the non-substantial changes shown be-
Secretary of Human Resources low.
Effective Date: June 29, 1987.

Attornev General's Certification
'Title 08 In accordance with State Government Article, �10-113,
Annotated Code of Maryland, the Attorney General certi-
DEPARTMENT OF fies that the following changes do not differ substantively
from the proposed text. The nature of each change and the
NATURAL RESOURCES basis for this conclusion are as follow:
Regulation .03D(3)(b): The new language is added to re-
Subtitle 03 WILDLIFE state the fact that tidal floodplains are not covered by this
regulation and precludes any misunderstanding by prospec-
08-03-08 Threatened and Endangered Species tive applicants on this issue. The State's regulatory authori-
ty pursuant to Natural Resources Article, Title 8, is specifi-
Authority: Natural Resources Article. �� 4-2A-01 - 4-2A-09, cally limited to the 100-year floodplain of free flowing
10-2A-01 - 10-2A-09, streams and does not encompass federally designated tidal
Annotated Code of Maryland special flocd hazard areas. Regulation .03 restates this limi-
tation on the State's jurisdiction.
Notice of Final Action .03 Requirements for a Permit.
187-061-F] A. - C. (proposed text unchanged)
On June 9, 1987, new Regulations .01 -.11 under a new D. Exemptions. The following activities are exempted
chapter, COMAR 08.03.08 Threatened and Endangered from the requirements for a permit from the Administration
Species, were adopted by the Secretarv of Natural Resourc- under this chapter:
es. Existing Regulations .01 and .'02 under COMAR 0) - (2) (proposed text unchanged)
08-03-08 Nongame and Endangered Species were re- (3) A person who proposes to channe in anY manner the
pealed. These actions, which were proposed for adoption in course, current, or cross-section of anY waters of the State
other than those referenced in �D(l) and (2) of this regula.
tion does not need a permit ftom the Administration if the:

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL. 14, ISSUE 13 FRIDAY, JUNE 19,1987

PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 719

required to give the Departmentl,,30 days notice before start-
Title 08 ing any action which.would result in an "incidental tak-
ing." Within that 30 day time period the Department must
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL either salvage the species or issue a permit for the "inciden-
tal take." The other added prohibitions are simply the same
RESOURCES acts prohibited by statute with respect to endangered spe-
cies.
Subtitle 03 WILDLIFE This proposal defines for the first time what criteria are
considered for designating Natural Heritage Areas. These
08.03.08 Threatened and Endangered Species Areas are an integral feature of the Critical Areas Criteria
Authority: Natural Resources Article, ��4-2A-01 - 4-2A-09 and (set forth under COAL4JR 14.15.01 - .11) and by adding this
��10-2A-01 - 10-2A-09, regulation the Department hopes to aid the counties and
Annotated Code of Maryland the Critical Areas Commission in the protection of these
Areas. Before Areas are designated the Department will no-
Notice of Proposed Action tify all landowners of the proposed designation. There will
[87-061-P) be maps made available along with other pertinent and
useful information. The Department hopes to work out
The Secretary of Natural Resources proposes to repeal management agreements with the landowners or buy con-
existing Regulations .01 and .02 under COMAR 08.03.08 servation easements for property included in an Area if nec-
Nongame and Endangered Species and to adopt new essary.
Regulations.01 -.11 under COMAR 08.03.08 Threatened The Critical Areas Criteria rely heavily on the Depart-
and Endangered Species. ment's Threatened and Endangered Species Program to aid
The proposed action does not affect any threatened and the counties in determining which species within the Crit-
endangered species regulation or designations under ical Area need protection. The Department has available
CONL4,11 08.02.12 Tidewater Administration. The pro- maps which locate listed species by planning zones and will
posed action includes an increase in the number of wildlife make all this information as readily available as possible.
species on the lists and for the first time includes plants. In The Department has always considered cooperative man-
addition, some species which meet the statutory definition agement agreements with private property owners to be the
of fish because they spend part of their life cycle in water, best way to preserve and protect habitat critical to threat-
namely', amphibians, reptiles, crustaceans, mollusks and ened and endangered species, and intends to continue to use
only those finfish of the species Blackbanded Sunfish (En- these agreements and other mutually agreeable manage-
neacanthus chaetodon), Maryland Darter (Etheostoma ment arrangements as much as possible.
sellare), Glassy Darter (Etheostoma vitreum), Stripeback
Darter (Percina notograma) and Trout-Perch (Percopsis om- Estimate of Economic Impact
iscomaycus) are added. The latter species are not game or I. Summary of Economic Impact. Administrative costs for
sport fish, therefore, are of no commercial significance. The units of the Department of Natural Resources will increase in
lists also contain, for the first time, the names of all those terms of more staff time to address protection of these species, and
species which are federally listed and, therefore, are re- some land acquisition costs will be incurred. Local governments
quired by Maryland law to be listed in Maryland. will bear some costs in addressing protection of the listed species as
The criteria for listing and delisting species are set out part of their Critical Areas programs.
and the process for petitioning the Department to list and 11. Types of Revenue
delist a species as allowed by law is specified. The proposal Economic Impacts: Expense Amount
also clarifies how to apply for the various permits which are
allowed by law and what factors are considered before they A. On issuing agency:
are issued. 1. Increased staff and sup-
port for threatened and endan-
Maryland law authorizes the Secretary to prohibit cer- gered species Pro am $193,497
tain acts with respect to threatened and endangered plants 2. Increased fZd acquisition
in addition to those set out in the statute. The added prohi- staff and support $74,106
bitions are: taking threatened and endangered plants 3. Additional acquisition of
from interests in land Indeterminable
private property without the permission of the owner and B. On other State or local
from State property without the permission of the Director; agencies affected:
and exporting, possessing, processing, selling, offering for Local jurisdictions protect
sale, delivering, carrying, transporting or shipping threat- threatened and endangered spe-
cies as part of Critical Areas pro-
ened plant species. The latter acts are already prohibited by grams $40.000-
statute with respect to endangered plants. $100,000
Maryland law also authorizes the Secretary to prohibit by C. On regulated industries or
regulation certain acts with respect to all other threatened trade groups: NONE
species besides plants. Since there were no threatened spe- Benefit
cies listed in the previous regulation, there were no addi- Cost Amount
tional prohibitions specified; thus, these regulations imple- D. On other industries or trade
ment that section of the law for the first time. Included in
the added prohibitions is an "incidental taking." This is a groups affected: NONE
taking of a species which is caused by another otherwise
lawful act, for example, the killing of a pond dwelling spe-
cies by filling in a pond for other reasons. The landowner is

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE-6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13, 19B7

720 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS

E. Direct and indirect effects D. "Incidental taking" means takings of listed species
on public: that are incidental to, and -not the purpose of, the carrying
1. Prohibition on taking en-
dangered wildlife may affect out of an otherwise lawful activity conducted by a person on
some real estate development Indeterminable private property.
2. Protect species' diversity Indeterminable E. "Jeopardize the continued existence of' means to en-
111. Assumptions. adentified by Impact Letter and Number gage in an action which reasonably would be expected, di-
from Section 11): rectly or indirectly, to reduce appreciably the likelihood of
Al. The amount indicated is a budget enhancement request for
six new positions plus support for the Threatened and Endangered either the survival or recovery of a listed species in the wild
Species program. While not all attributable to the listing of species by reducing the reproduction, numbers, or distribution of a
represented by this regulation, a significant portion of the addition- listed species or other-wise adversely affecting the species.
al staff time for which the new resources will be needed is W meet F. "Listed species" means a species of flora or fauna
the needs of an expanded list of threatened and endangered species. deemed endangered, threatened or in need of conservation in
A2. The amount indicated is a budget enhancement request for this chapter due to any of the following factors:
two new positions plus support for acquisition of interests in land (1) Present or threatened destruction, modification, or
that may prove necessary to protect threatened and endangered curtailment of the species'habitat or range,
species. (2) Overutilization for commercial, sporting, scientific,
A3. At this time, it is impossible to calculate how much could be educational, or other purposes,
spent for acquisition of interests in land. The figure indicated is the
amount budgeted in FY 1987 for acquisition of interests in property (3) Disease or predation;
for protection of lands that support diverse ecological communities (4) Inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
of plants or animals, including forestlands, habitats of rare, threat- (5) Other natural or manmade factors affecting the spe-
ened or endangered species, and areas necessary for watershed pro- cies'continued existence within the State.
tection. A similar amount has been requested for FY 1988. G. "Natural heritage area" means any natural communi-
B. The costs of local governments to develop Critical Area pro- ty of species designated in Regulation .10 in this chapter.
grams will be approximately $2,150,000 for FY 1987. A similar H. "Person " means any county, municipal corporation, or
amount has been requested for FY 1988. The Director of the Crit- other political subdivision of the State, an individual, corpo-
ical Areas program estimates that between 2 percent and 5 percent
of these costs may be attributable to that portion of the work in- ration, receiver, trustee, guardian, executor, administrator,
voiving threatened and endangered species. fiduciary, or representative.
El. and E2. There is presently no trade in Maryland in any of L "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Department of
the listed species, and therefore no impact is anticipated as a result Natural Re-sources.
of prohibiting such commerce. The prohibition on taking endan- J. "Service" means the Maryland Forest, Park and Wild-
gered species of wildlife in any manner will have some localized life Service.
impacts on land use, but the impacts are indeterminable at this K. "Species" means any species of wildlife or plant and
time. As to endangered or threatened species of plants, threatened reptiles, amphibians, crustaceans, mollusks and the follow-
species of wildlife, and wildlife species in neeed of conservation, the ing finfish: Enneacanthus chaetodon, Etheostoma sellare,
regulation prohibits only directed efforts to take the species; inci-
dental impacts on the species from legitimate uses of land are not Etheostoma vitreurn, Percina notograma, Per-copsis omisco-
prohibited. Therefore, the listing of these species will not have an maycus or any part, egg, offspring, or dead body of any of
impact. Finally, there wW be a long-term, positive, but incalculable them.
benefit to the people of Maryland by protecting the diversity of L. "Species in need of conservation " means any species de-
species in the State. termined by the Secretary to be in need of conservation mea-
sures for its continued ability to sustain itself successfully.
Opportunity for Public Comment M. "Take" means to harass, har7n, pursue, hunt, shoot,
Written comments may be sent to James Mallow, Forest, wound, kill, trup, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in
Park and Wildlife Service, Department of Natural Resourc- any such conduct.
es, Tawes State Office Building, Annapolis, MD 21401 or N. "Threatened species" means any species of flora orfau-
call 974-3771 Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Pub- na which appears likely, within the foreseeable future, to
lic comment must be received not later than April 20, 1987 become endangered including any species determined to be a
at 4 p.m. "threatened species" pursuant to the federal Endangered
If sufficient interest is shown a public hearing will be Species Act of 1973, 16 US.C ��1531 - 1543.
held. Copies of this proposal are available from James Mal- .02 Petitioning.
low at the address given above. A. Except for species determined to be threatened or en-
.01 Deftnitions. dangered pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act of
A. "Director" means the Director of the Maryland Forest, 1973, 16 US.C ��1531 - 1543, any interested person may
Park and Wildlife Service. petition the Director to add or remove a species or natural
B. "Endangered extirpated species" means any species heritage area to or from a list in this chapter. The Director
that was once a viable component of the flora or fauna of the shall review the evidence regarding the requested action and
State but for which no naturally occurring populations are make a recommendation to the Serretary whether or not to
known to exist in the State. Most of these species have not list or delist the species or natural heritage area.
been recorded in Maryland since 1950. B. In a petition to list or delist a natural heritage area,
C. "Endangered species" means any species whose tontin- the following information shall be provide&
ued existence as a viable component of the State's flora or (1) A map of the proposed natural heritage area.
fauna is determined to be in jeopardy including any species (2) A description of the physical boundaries of the pro-
determined to be an "endangered species" pursuant to the posed area, total acreage, landowner name and address.
pecies Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. ��1531 -
federal Endangered S (3) A description of the biological community represent-
1543. ed by the natural heritage area including. as far as practi-
cal, a list of the fauna and flora there, and other geologic,

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987

PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 721

hydrologic, or other features which blend together to make (1) Whether the species is reg'tricted to a minimal geo.
this area unique. graphic area within Maryland;
(4) A description of all major threats to the continued (2) Whether the species has experienced a rapid, sub-
existence of the area, or if petitioning to delist an area, a stantial decline in Maryland, and if the decline continues,
description of how the natural features and species composi- the species' extirpation from Maryland is imminent,
tion of the area have changed so it is no longer suitable to be (3) Whether the species' essential habitat has been rap-
designated as a natural heritage area. idly lost and that loss is likely to continue;
(5) A statement indicating why the area should or (4) Whether the species' biology makes it highly suscep-
should not be considered as among the best statewide exam- tible to changes in its environment; or
ples of its kind. (5) Whether -the species' essential habitat is easily al-
(6) Other relevant information which might assist the tered by even relatively minor activities.
Director in making a determination. B. Permits. The permit procedures to be followed are set
C. All sites used for evidence of current abundance shall forth in Regulation .03. The following apply:
be extant and all sitings shall be documented with appropri- (1) Permits shall be issued only for scientific research
ate vouchers. In a petition to list or delist a species, the fol- designed to enhance the recovery of the species orpopulation.
lowing information shall be provided: (2) A person may not take, export, possess, process, sell
(1) A description of the biological distribution of the or offer for sale, deliver, carry, transport, or ship by any
species in Maryland. means any endangered wildlife, reptile, amphibian, mol-
(2) Its life needs and habitat requirements. lusk, crustacean or finfish species except by special permit
(3) Evidence of its decline or evidence that it is more from the Director.
common than previously believed and documented C. The following wildlife, reptile, amphibian, mollusk,
(4) All known threats which jeopardize its continued ex- crustacean and finfish species are considered endangered
istence. throughout Maryland unless a smaller range is indicated:
(5) Other relevant biological and ecological data or oth- (1) Platyhelminthes. A Planarian (Procotyla @vphlops).
er life history information pertinent to its status. (2) Mollusks. Ancient Floater (Alasmidonta heterodon).
(6) The species shall be presently recognized as a valid (3) Crustaceans.
species, or infraspecific taxa of regional or national signifi- (a) Dearoll's Gave Amphipod (Crangonyx dearolfi);
cance. There shall be adequate documentation that it occurs (b) Greenbriar Cave Amphipod (Stygobromus emargi-
naturally and is permanently established in Maryland natus),-
.03 Permits. lipes). (c) Shenandoah Cave Amphipod (Stygobromus graci-
A. Permits to take, transport, possess, sell, offer for sale, (4) Insects.
export or import any listed species may be obtained from the (a) Northeastern Beach Tiger-Beetle (Cicindela dor-
Director only after written application on a form provided by salis),
the Service, and upon payment of a fee of $25. (b) Puritan Tiger-Beetle (Cicindela puritana);
B. Each permit shall be subject to an expiration date and (c) Six-Banded Longhorn-Beetle (Dryobius sexnota-
other limitations as may be prescribed by the Director. tus),-
C Each permit application requesting permission to take (d) Regal Fritillary (Speyeria idalia).
a listed species from private property shall be accompanied (5) Fish. Maryland Darter (Etheostoma sellare).
by a signed statement from the landowner granting the ap- (6) Amphibians.
plicant permission to enter the property to take the species. (a) Eastern Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma tigrinumi;
D. A permit application shall describe the purpose of the (b) Green Salamander (Aneides aeneus),-
request in such detail that the Director can determine (c) Hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis);
whether it is in the best interest of the species and the State (d) Eastern Narrow-Mouthed Toad (Gastrophryne
to issue it. carolinensis).
E. The Director shall consider, but not be limited to, the (7) Reptiles.
following information: (a) Atlantic Leatherback Turtle (Dermochelvs cort .a-
(1) The number of other known occurrences of the spe- cea);
cies in the State; (b) Atlantic Hawksbill Turtle (Eretmochelys imbrica-
on: (2) Which of the occurrences of the species in �E(1) exist ta),- (c) Northern Coal Skink (Eumeces anthracinus),
(a) Private lands; (d) Atlantic Ridley Turtle (Lepidochelys kempi);
(b) Public lands; and (e) Mountain Earth Snake (Virginia valeriae pul-
(c) What protection there is for the species' continued chra).
existence. (8) Birds.
(3) The number of individuals in the occurrences of the (a) Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus);
species in �E(1) and the relative state of ecological stability.
F. Violation of any provision or-restriction of the permit b) Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus),-
shall constitute a violation of this regulation and may re- (c) Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus);
sult, at the discretion of the Director, in the revocation of the (d) Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus),
permit and confiscation of the species taken or possessed. (e) Bewick's Wren (Thryomanes bewickii).
(9) Mammals.
.04 Endangered Species of Wildlife@ Reptiles, (a) Black Right Whale (Balaena glacialis);
A mph ibians, Mollusks, Crustaceans, and Finflish. (b) Sei Whale (Balaenoptera borealis);
A. Listing Criteria. The following factors shall be consid- (c) Blue Whale (Balaenoptera musculus),
ered for listing any species other than plants as endangered: (d) Finback Whale (Balaenoptera ph.ysalus).

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987

722 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS

(e) Humpback Whale (Megapteru novaeangliae); (28) Cream-Flowered Tick-Trefoil (Desmodium ochro-
(f) Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis), leucum);
(g) Sperm Whale (Physeter catodon); (29) Rigid Tick-Trefoil (Desmodium rigidum);
(h) Delmarva Fox Squirrel (Sciurus niger cinereus); (30) Pineland Tick-Trefoil (Desmodium strictum);
(i) Water Shrew (Sorex palustris). (31) Pink Sundew (Drosera capillaris);
.05 Endangered Specieg of Plants. (32) Log Fern (Dryopteris celsa),-
(33) Knotted Spikerush (Eleocharis equisetoides);
A. Listing Criteria. The following factors shall be consid- (34) Black-Fruited Spikerush (Eleocharis melanocarpa);
ered for listing a plant species as endangered: (35) Robbins'Spikerush (Eleocharis robbinsii);
(1) Whether only a few populations are known in Mary- (36) Water Horsetail (Equisetum fluviatile),-
land and they cover only a small portion of land; (37) Bent-Awn Plumegrass (Erianthus contortus),-
(2) Whether the species is restricted to a minimal geo- (38) Parker's Pipewort (Eriocaulon parkeri);
graphic area; (39) White-Bructed Boneset (Eupatorium leucolepis);
(3) Whether the species has experienced a substantial (40) Darlington's Spurge (Euphorbia purpurea);
decline in Maryland, and if the decline continues, the spe- (41) Harper's Fimbristylis (Fimbristylis perpusilla),-
cies'extirpation from Maryland is imminent; (42) Box Huckleberry (Gaylussacia brachycera);
(4) Whether the species' essential habitat has been rap- (43) Swamp-Pink (Helonias bullata),
idly lost and that loss is likely to continue; (44) Featherfoil (Hottonia inflata),
(5) Whether the species' biology makes it highly suscep- (45) Creeping St. John's- Wort (Hypericum adpressum),-
tible to changes in its environment; or (46) Coppery St. John's- Wort (Hypericum denticulatum);
(6) Whether the species' essential habitat is easily al- (47) Dwarf Iris (Iris verna);
tered bY even relatively minor activities. (48) Red-Root (Lachnanthes caroliana);
B. Permits. The permit procedures to be followed are set (49) (Leersia hexandra);
forth in Regulation .03. The following apply: (50) Star Duckweed (Lemna trisulca);
(1) Permits shall be issued only for scientific research (51) Downy Bushclover (Lespedeza stuevei),-
designed to enhance the recovery of the species or population; (52) Mudwort (Limosella subulata);
(2) A person may not: (53) Sandplain Flax (Linum intercursum);
(a) Export, possess, process, sell, offer for sale, deliver, (54) Pondspice (Litsea aestivalis);
carry, transport, or ship by any means any endangered plant (55) Canby's Lobelia (Lobelia canbvi),-
species without a special permit from the Director, the feder- (56) (Ludwigia glandulosa);
al government, or another state government; (57) Hairy Ludwigia (Ludwigia hirtella);
(b) Take any endangered plant species from State (58) Sessile-Leaved Water-Horehound (Lycopus amplec-
Property except by special permit from the Director; and tens),
(c) Take any endangered plant species from private (59) Erect Water-Hyssop (Mecardonia acuminatak
property without the written permission of the landowner. (60) Torrey's Dropseed (Muhlenbergia torreyana),
C The following plant species are considered endangered (61) Low Water-Milfoil (Myriophyllum humile);
throughout Maryland unless a smaller range is indicated: (62) Floating-Heart (Nymphoides cordata);
(1) Sensitive Joint-Vetch (Aeschynomene virginica); (63) Virginia False-Gromwell (Onosmodium virginia-
(2) Sandplain Gerardia (Agalinis acuta),- num);
(3) (Agalinis fasciculata); (64) Canby's Dropwort (Oxypolis canbyi),-
(4) Thread-Leaved Gerardia (Agalinis setacea); (65) Tall Swamp Panicgrass (Panicum scabriusculum),
(5) Woolly Three-Awn (Aristida lanosa),- (66) Wright's Panicgrass (Panicum wrightianum);
(6) Virginia Heartleaf (Asarum virginicum); (67) Kidneyleaf Grass-of-Parnassus (Parnassia asarifo-
(7) Red Milkweed (Asclepias rubra); lia);
(8) Serpentine Aster (Aster depauperatus); (68) Yellow Nailwort (Paronychia virginica);
(9) Tickseed Sunflower (Bidens coronata),- (69) Walter's Paspalum (Paspalum dissectum);
(10) Small Beggar-Ticks (Bidens discoidea); (70) Canby's Mountain Lover (Paxistima canbyi),-
(11) (Bidens mitis);
(12) Aster-Like Boltonia (Boltonia asteroides); (71) Blue Scorpion- Weed (Phacelia ranunculacea),-
(23) Grass-Pink (Calopogon tuberosus); (72) Jacob's-Ladder (Polemonium van-bruntiae);
(14) Long's Bittercress (Cardamine longii); (73) Cross-Leaved Milkwort (Polygala cruciata);
(15) Barratt's Sedge (Carex barrattii),- (74) Dense-Flowered Knotweed (Polygonum densiflo-
(16) Buxbaum's Sedge (Carex buxbaumi),- rum);
(17) Coast Sedge (Carex exilis); is); (75) Slender Rattlesnake-Root (Prenanthes autumnal-
(18) Giant Sedge (Carex gigantea); (76) Alleghany Plum (Prunus alleghaniensis),-
(19) (Carex joorii),
(20) Dark Green Sedge (Carex venusta); (77) Short-Beaked Baldrush (Psilocarya nitens);
(21) Marsh Wild Senna (Cassia fasciculata var. macros- (78) Long-Beaked Baldrush (Psilocarya scirpoides);
perma); (79) Harperella (Ptilimnium nodosum)-
(22) Spreading Pogonia (Cleistes divaricata); (80) One-Sided Pyrola (Pyrola secunda);
(23) Wrinkled Jointgrass (Coelorachis rugosa),- (81) Yellow Water-Crowfoot (Ranunculus flabellaris);
(24) Wister's Coralroot (Corallorhiza wisteriana), (82) (Rhynchosia tomentosa);
(83) Short-Bristled Hornedrush (Rhynchospora cornicu-
(25) Fraser's Sedge (Cymophyllus fraseri); lata);
(26) Smooth Tick-Trefoil (Desmodium laevigatum); (84) Thread-Leaved Beakrush (Rhynchospora filifolia),
(27) Linear-Leaved Tick-Trefoil (Desmodium lineatum); (85) Grass-Like Beakrush (Rhynchospora globularis);

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987

PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 723

(86) Clustered Beakrush (Rhynchospora glomerata); (33) Chaffweed (Centunculus minimus);
(87) Drowned Hornedrush (Rhynchospora inundata); (34) Purple Clematis (Clematis occidentalis);
(88) Torrey's Beakrush (Rhynchospora torreyana), (35) Curly-Heads (Clematis ocroleuca);
(89) Sacciolepis (Sacciolepis striata); (36) Rose Coreopsis (Coreopsis rosea);
(90) Sessile-Fruited Arrowhead (Sagittaria rigida); (37) Pygmyweed (Crassula aquatica),
(91) Sandbar Willow (Salix exigua); (38) Hazel Dodder (Cuscuta coryli);
(92) Canby's Bulrush (Scirpus etuberculatus), (39) (Cyperus plukenetii),
(93) Water Clubrush (Scirpus subterminalis); (40) Showy Ladies Slipper (Cypripedium reginae);
(94) Slender Nutrush (Scleria minor), (41) Few-Flowered Tick-Trefoil (Desmodium pauciflo-
(95) Pink Bog-Button (Sclerolepis uniflora); rum);
(96) Halberd-Leaved Greenbrier (Smilax pseudo-china); (42) (Digitaria villosa);
(97) Red-Berried Greenbrier (Smilax walteri); (43) (Eleocharis halophila);
(98) Showy Goldenrod (Solidago speciosa); (44) Three-Ribbed Spikerush (Eleocharis tricostata),
(99) Two-Flowered Bladderwort (Utricularia biflora); (45) Downy Willowherb (Epilobium strictum);
(100) Fringed Yelloweyed-Grass (Xyris fimbriata); (46) Seven-Angled Pipewort (Eriocaulon septangulare),
(101) Small's Yelloweyed-Grass (Xyris smalliana). (47) Tall Rattlesnake Master (Eryngium yuccifolium);
.06 Endangered Extirpated Species. (48) (Festuca paradoxa),
A. Listing Criteria. The following factors shall be consid- (49) Pumpkin Ash (Fraxinus profunda),
(50) Small Bedstraw (Galium trifidum);
ered for listing a species as endangered extirpated: (51) (Gentiana puberula),
(1) The species was once a viable component of the (52) Sea Milkwort (Glaux maritima);
State's flora and fauna and there are no records of it natu- (53) Sharp-Scaled Mannagrass (Glyceria acutiflora);
rally occurring in Maryland after 1950: or (54) Dwarf Rattlesnake-Plantain (Goodyera repens),
(2) The species was once a viable component of the (55) Tesselated Rattlesnake-Plantain (Goodyera tessela-
State's flora or fauna and recent scientific investigations ta)-
have documented the loss of its habitat or disappearance of (56) (Gratiola ramosa);
its population in Maryland. (57) Rough Heuchera (Heuchera villosa);
B. Permits. Upon the discovery of a viable, naturally oc- (58) Sea-Beach Sandwort (Honkenya peploides),
cur-ring population of any species in ��C - H, that species (59) Nits-and-Lice (Hypericum drummondii);
will be considered an endangered species and shall require (60) Clasping-Leaved St. John's-Wort (Hypericum gym-
the permits and conditions afforded to that status. nanthum),
C. The following plant species are considered endangered (61) Great St. John's-Wort (Hypericum pyramidatum);
extirpated throughout Maryland: (62) Bloodleaf Iresine rhizomatosa);
(1) Pine-Barren Gerardia (Agalinis virgata); (63) Small Whorled Pogonia (Isotria medeoloides);
(2) Rough-Stemmed Wheatgrass (Agropyron trachycau- (64) Small-Headed Rush (Juncus brachycephalus);
lum);
(3) Golden Colicroot (Aletris aurea); (65) New Jersey Rush (Juncus caesariensis);
(4) Beach Pigweed (Amaranthus pumilus), (66) (Juncus megacephalus);
(5) Canada Anemone (Anemone canadensis); (67) Bavonet Rush (Juncus militaris);
(6) Great Angelica (Angelica atropurpurea),- (68) Torrey's Rush (Juncus torreyi);
(7) Filmy Angelica (Angelica triquinata); (69) Common Juniper (Juniperus communis);
(8) Arethusa (Arethusa bulbosa); (70) Narrow-Leaved Pinweed (Lechea tenuifolia);
(9) Lake Cress (Armoracia aquatica),- (71) Catchfly-Grass (Leersia lenticularis);
(10) Bradley's Spleenwort (Asplenium bradleyi); (72) Long-Awned Diplanche (Leptochloa fascicularis);
(11) Steele's Aster (Aster concinnus); (73) Fall Witchgrass (Leptoloma cognatum);
(12) Silvery Aster (Aster concolor); (74) Scaly Blazing-Star (Liatris squarrosa);
(13) Showy Aster (Aster spectabilis), (75) American Lovage (Ligusticum canadense);
(14) (Axonopus furcatus); (76) American Frog's-Bit (Limnobium spongia);
(15) Mat-Forming Water-Hyssop, (Bacopa stragula), (77) Twinflower (Linnaea borealis);
(16) Sea Ox-Eye (Borrichia frutescens); (78) Florida Yellow Flax (Linum floridanum);
(17) Triangle Grape-Fern (Botrychium lanceolatum); (79) Heartleaf Twayblade (Listera cordata);
(18) Leathery Grape-Fern (Botrychium multifidum), (80) (Lobelia glandulosa);
(19) Small Grape-Fern (Botrychium simplex); (81) Carolina Clubmass (Lycopodium carolinianum);
(20) Blue-Hearts (Buchnera americana); (82) Large-Flowered Barbara's Buttons (Marshallia
(21) Great Indian-Plantain (Cacalia muhlenbergii); grandiflora),
(22) (Carex careyana); (83) (Matelea decipieas);
(23) Cypress-Knee Sedge (Carex decomposita); (84) (Matelea obliqua);
(24) (Carex foenea); um), (85) Broad-Leaved Bunchflower (Melanthium latifoli-
(25) (Carex glaucescens); (86) Nuttall's Micranthemum (Micraiithemum micran-
(26) Lake-Bank Sedge (Carex lacustris); themoides);
(27) New England Sedge (Carex novae-angliae); (87) Evergreen Bayberry (Myrica heterophvlla),-
(28) Variable Sedge (Carex polymorpha); (88) Thread-Like Naiad (Najas gracillima);
(29) (Carex striatula); (89) Northern Panicgrass (Panicum boreale);
(30) (Carex tenera); (90) MaY Grass (Pharlaris caroliniana);
(31) (Carex tetanica); (91) (Phlox carolina);
(32) Wood's Sedge (Carex woodii),

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987

724 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS

(92) (Phlox glaberrima); (5) Red-Cockaded Woodpecker (Pic6ides borealis),
(93) Mountain Phlox (Phlox latifola); (6) Roseate Tern (Sterna dougallii);
(94) Downy Phlox (Phlox pilosa); (7) Greater Prairie Chicken (Tympanuchus cupido).
(95) Heart-Leaved Plantain (Plantago cordata); H, The following mammal species are considered endan-
(96) Slender Plantain (Plantago, pusilla); gered extirpated throughout Maryland:
(97) (Poa saltuensis); (1) Gray Wolf (Canis lupus);
(98) Clammyweed (Polansia dodecandra), (2) American Elk (Cervus canadensis);
(99) America Ipecac (Porteranthus stipulatus); (3) Eastern Mountain Lion (Felis concolor),
(100) Redheadgrass (Potamogeton richardsonii); (4) Snowshoe Hare (Lepus americanus),
(101) Robbins'Pondweed (Potamogeton robbinsii); (5) Marten (Martes americana).
(102) Flatstem Pondweed (Potamogeton zosteriformis),- .07 Threatened Species of Wildlife, Reptiles, Amphibi-
(103) Pale Mannagrass (Puccinellia pallida); ans, Mollusks, Crustaceans, and Finfish.
(104) Awned Mountain-Mint (Pycnanthemum setosum),- A. Listing Criteria. The following factors shall be consid-
(105) Greenish-Flowered Pyrola (Tyrola virens), ered for listing species other than plant species as threat-
(106) (Ranunculus hederaceus);
(107) Bristly Crowfoot (Ranunculus pensylvanicus); ened:
(108) Awned Meadow-Beaut (Rhexia aristosa); (1) Whether the species has experienced a steady, sub-
stantial decline in Maryland, and if the decline continues,
(109) Tiny-Headed Beakrush (Rhynchospora microce- the species is likely to become endangered;
phala),- (2) Whether there has been steady, widespread loss of
(110) Few-Flowered Beakrush (Rhynchospora rariflora); the species' essential habitat; or
(111) Wild Black Currant (Ribes americanum); (3) Whether protection measures already taken have sig-
(112) Hain, Wild Petunia (Ruellia humilus); nificantly reduced the chances of the species becoming extir-
(113) Pursh's Ruellia (Ruellia purshiana); pated from Maryland.
(114) Slender Marsh Pink (Sabatia campanulata),- B. Permits. The permit procedures to be followed are set
(115) Lance-Leaved Sabatia (Sabatia difformis); forth in Regulation .03. The following apply:
(116) Slender Arrowhead (Sagittaria teres); (1) Except by special permit from the Director a person
(117) Shining Willow (Salix lucida); may not take, export, possess, process, sell, offer for sale, de-
(118) (Salvia urticifolia); liver, carry, transport or ship by any means any threatened
(119) Hard-Stem Bulrush (Scirpus acutus),- wildlife, reptile, amphibian, mollusk, crustacean or finfish
(120) Torrey's Clubrush (Scirpus torreyi),- species.
(121) Shining Nutrush (Scleria nitida),- (2) Permits to take threatened species shall be issued
(122) Veined Skullcap (Scutellaria nervosa),- only for:
(123) Small Skullcap (Scutellaria parvula); (a) Scientific research designed to enhance the recov-
(124) Sand Blueeved-Grass (Sisyrinchium arenicola); ery of the species or population;
(125) Mountain Goldenrod (Solidago roanensis); (b) Other valid scientific research; or
(126) Rock Goldenrod (Solidago, rupestris); (c) Educational purposes designed to further public
(127) (Sorghastrum elliottii),- awareness regarding the species.
(128) Indian-Pink (Spigelia marilandica); (3) Incidental taking of a threatened wildlife, reptile,
(129) (Stachys aspera); amphibian, mollusk, crustacean or finfish species shall be
(130) Trailing Stitchwort (Stellaria alsine), allowed only after the Director has been notified 30 days in
(131) (Tephrosia spicata),- advance of the change in land use or other action by a pri-
(132) Coastal False Asphodel (Tofteldila racemosa); vate landowner which shall result in the incidental taking.
(133) Auricled Gerardia (Tomanthern auriculata);
(134) Buffalo Clover (Trifolium reflexurn); The Maryland Forest, Park and Wildlife Service, upon re-
(135) (Triglochin striatum); ceipt of the application for an incidental takingpermit from
(136) Tall Cornsalad (Valerianella umbilicata), the landowner, shall within 30 days either:
(137) Purple Vetch (Vicia americana); (a) Take action to salvage the threatened species; or
(138) Wolffiella (Wolffiella floridana). (b) Issue to the landowner an incidental taking per-
D. The following fish species are considered endangered mit authorizing the landowner to proceed with the action
extirpated throughout Maryland. which will result in the incidental taking of the species.
(1) Glassy Darter (Etheostoma vitreum), C. The following species are considered to be threatened
(2) Stripeback Darter (Percina notograma); throughout Maryland unless a smaller range is indicated:
(3) Trout-Perch (Percopsis omiscomaycus). (1) Crustaceans. Allegheny Cave Amphipod (Stygobro-
E. The following amphibian species is considered endan- mus allegheniensis).
gered extirpated throughout Maryland. Greater Siren (Stren (2) Insects. Rare Skipper (Problema bulenta).
lacertina). (3) Reptiles.
F. The following reptile species is considered endangered (a) Atlantic Loggerhead Turtle (Caretta caretta),-
extirpated throughout Maryland: Rainbow Snake (Farancia (b) Atlantic Green Turtle (Chelonia mydas).
erytrogramma). (4) Birds. Black Skimmer (Rynchops niger).
G. The following bird species are considered endangered .08 Threatened Species of Plants.
extirpated throughout Maryland: A. Listing Criteria. The following factors shall be consid-
(1) Bachman's Sparrow (Aimophila aestivalis); ered for listing a plant species as threatened:
(2) Ivory-Billed Woodpecker (Campephilus principalis); (1) Whether the species has experienced a substantial
(3) Lark Sparrow (Chondestes grammacus); decline in Maryland, and if the decline continues, the species
(4) Eskimo Curlew (Noumenius borealis); is likely to become endangered,

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987

PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 725

(2) Whether there has been a steady widespread loss of (a) Scientific research designed to enhance the recov-
the species' essential habitat, or ery of the species or population;
(3) Whether the species has been listed as endangered (b) Other valid scientific research; or
but it has been shown that protection measures taken have (0 Educational purposes designed to further public
significantly reduced the chances of the species becoming ex- awareness regarding the species.
tirpated from Maryland. (3) Incidental taking permits are not required for spe-
B. Permits. The permit procedures to be followed are set cies in need of conservation.
forth in Regulation .03. The following apply. C. The following species are considered to be in need of
(1) Permits shall be issued only for scientific research conservation throughout Maryland unless a smaller range is
designed to enhance the recovery of the species orpopulation. indicated:
(2) A person may not: (1) Insects. King's Hairstreak (Satyrium kingi).
(a) Export, possess, process, sell, offer for sale, deliver, (2) Fish. Blackbanded Sunfish (Enneacanthus chaeto-
car7y, transport, or ship by any means any threatened plant don).
species except by a special permit from the Director; (3) Amphibians. Carpenter Frog (Rana virgatipes).
(b) Take any threatened plant species from State prop- (4) Reptiles. Map Turtle (Graptemys geographica).
erty except by special permit from the Director; and (5) Birds.
(c) Take any threatened plant species from private (a) Henslow's Sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii),
property without the written permission of the landowner. (b) Short-Eared Owl (Asio flarnmeus);
C. The following plant species are considered threatened (0 American Bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus);
throughout Maryland unless a smaller range is indicated: (d) Sedge Wren (Cistothorus platensis),
(1) Single-Headed Pussytoes (Antennaria solitaria); (e) Little Blue Heron (Egretta caerulea),-
(2) Giant Cane (Arundinaria gigantea); (f) Common Moorhen (Gallinula chloropus);
(3) Glade Fern (Athyrium pycnocarpon), (g) American Oyster-catcher (Haernatopus palliatus);
(4) Maryland Bur-Marigold (Bidens bidentoides); (h) Least Bittern (Ixobrvchus exilis);
(5) Button Sedge (Carex bullata); (i) Black Rail (Laterallus jamaicensis);
(6) Shoreline Sedge (Carex hyalinolepis),- (0 Swainsons Warbler (Limnothlypis swainsonii),-
(7) Inflated Sedge (Carex vesicaria); (k) Least Tern (Sterna antillarum).
(8) Leatherleaf (Chamaedaphne calyculata); (6) Mammals.
(9) Red Turtlehead (Chelone obliqua); (a) Porcupine (Erethizon dorsatum4-
(10) Goldenseal (Hydrastis canadenis); (b) Bobcat (Lynx rufus);
(11) Deciduous Holly (Ilex decidua); (0 Least Weasel (Mustela nivalis);
(12) Narrow-Leaved Bushclover (Lespedeza angustifo- (d) Small-Footed Bat (Myotis leibii),-
(13) Wild Lupine (Lupinus perennis); (e) Southeastern Shrew (Sorex longirostris).
(14) Climbing Fern (Lygodium palmatum); .10 Natural Heritage Areas.
(15) American Lotus (Nelumbo, lutea); A. Listing Criteria. In order to qualify as a natural heri-
(16) Red Bay (Persea borbonia),, tage area a natural community shall:
(17) Pale Green Orchis (Platanthera flava); . (1) Contain one or more threatened or endangered spe-
(18) Purple Fringeless Orchis (Platanthera perarnoena); cies or wildlife species in need of conservation;
(19) Spongy Lophotocarpus (Sagittaria calycina),- (2) Be a unique blend of geological, hydrological, clima-
(20) Engelmann's Arrowhead (Sagitttaria engelmanni . talogical or biological features; and
ana); (3) Be considered to be among the best Statewide exam-
(21) Northern Pitcher-Plant (Sarracenia purpurea), ples of its kind.
(22) Virginia Mallow (Sida hermaphrodita),- B. The Forest, Park and Wildlife Service shall prepare
(23) Featherbells (Stenanthium gramineum),- maps describing the location of all natural heritage areas.
(24) Mountain Pimpernel (Taenidia montana); The maps shall be filed in the office of the Director of the
(25) Steele's Meadowrue (Thalictrum steeleanum), Forest, Park and Wildlife Service, Department of Natural
olium virginicum);
(26) Kate's-Mountain Clover (Trif Resources, Tawes State Office Building, Annapolis, MD
(27) Dwarf Trillium (Trillium pusillum),- 21401.
(28) Purple Bladderwort (Utricularia purpurea). C. The following areas are designated natural heritage ar.
eas:
.09 Specie8 in Need of Conservation- (1) Kasecamp Shale Barrens ......... Allegan), Countv;
A. Listing Criteria. The following factors shall be consid- (2) Maple Run ...................... Allegany Coun'v:
ered for listing a species as in need of conservation: (3) Outdoor Club Shale Barrens ...... Alleganv County:
(1) Whether the population is limited or declining with- (4) SidelingHill Creek ..Allegany, Washington Count'$',
in Maryland@- and (5) Cypress Creek Swamp ....... Anne Arundel Countv:
(2) Whether the species may become threatened in the (6) Eagle Hill Bog .............. Anne Arundel Count@,:
foreseeable future, if current trends or conditions persist. (7) Upper Patuxent
B. Permits. The permit procedures to be followed are set Marshes..AnneArundel, Prince George's Countv;
forth in Regulation .03. The following apply: (8) Black Marsh ................... Baltimore Count .y:
(1) Except by special permit, a person may not take, ex- (9) Robert E. Lee Park .............. Baltimore Count'y:
port, possess, process, sell, offer for sale, deliver, carry, trans- (10) Camp Roosevelt Cliffs ............ Calvert Countv.,
port, or ship by any means any species in need of conserva- (11) Cove Point Marsh ............. @ . . Calvert Cou n t.v:
tion. (12) Flag Ponds ...................... Calvert Count@'v:
(2) Permits to take species in need of conservation shall (13) Randle Cliff Beach ............... Calvert Count-i.-
be issued only for:

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987

726 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS

(14) Grove Neck ........................ Cecil County; 11. Types of
(15) Plum Creek ........................ Cecil County; Economic Impacts. Revenue
Expense Magnitude
(16) Allen's Fresh .................... Charles County,
(17) Chicamuxen Creek ............... Charles County; A. On issuing agency:
(18) Popes Creek ..................... Charles County; The Department expects an in-
(19) Upper Nanjemoy Creek ........... Charles County; crease in workload as a result of
the deletion of certain exemp-
(20) Chicone Creek ................ Dorchester County; tions. $141,000
(21) Mill Creek .................... Dorchester County; B. On other State or local
(22) Savanna Lake ................ Dorchester County; agencies affected:
(23) Upper Blackwa ter River ....... Dorchester County; Additional cost to prepare sub.-
(24) Upper Nanticoke River, Marshes mittals to the Department for re-
view and approval. Indeterminable.
and Swamps ...... Dorchester, Wicomico,County, Depends on
(25) High Rock ...................... Garrett County; amount of
(26) Toliver Run ..................... Garrett County- applications
received from
(27) Great Falls ................. Montgomery County; other agencies.
(28) Irish Grove .................... Somerset County; C. On regulated industries or
(29) Hickory Point Cypress Swamp ... Worcester County- trade groups:
(30) Lower Nassawango Creek ....... Worcester County, 1. Additional cost to prepare
engineered submittals to the
(31) Mattaponi .................... Worcester County; Department for review and ap-
(32) North Sinepuxent Bay Dunes .... Worcester County. proval. $5()0,000
2. Cost to persons obtaining
.11 Violation ofRegulations. a permit due to processing
Violation of these regulations is a misdemeanor punish- time. $87,250
able under Natural Resources Articles, ��10-2A-07, 10-1101 3. Time delay for those proj-
ects that require an adminis-
et seq.. 4-2.4-07, and 4-1201 et seq., Annotated Code of Mary- trative opportunity for a pub-
land. lic hearing. $105,000
D. On other industries or
TORREY C. BROWN, M.D trade groups affected:
Certain delays in starting the
Secretary of Natural Resources intended works mav be incurred
to the permit applicant as a re-
sult of the regulatory process.
These delays could be borne by
trade groups or subcontractors
as a result of scheduling prob-
Subtitle 05 WATER RESOURCES lems. Determined on
ADMINISTRATION a case-bv-case
basis but could
result in lost
08.05.03 Construction on Non-Tidal Waters earnings to
and Floodplains E. Direct and indirect effects trace groups.
Authority Natural Resources Article ��8-801 thru 8-814, on public: Could be very
Annotated Code of Maryland large.
III. Assumptions. (Identified by Impact 1,etter and Number
Notice of Proposed Action from Section ID:
[87-060-P) A. A 20 percent increase in applications received is anticipated
which would bring the total number of files reviewed by WRA to
The Secretary of Natural Resources proposes to amend 1,200 yearly. Each engineer reviews an average of 174 files per year
Regulation .03 under COMAR 08.05.03 Construction on and an inspector inspects an average of 72 waterway permit proj-
Non-Tidal Waters and Floodplains. The purpose of this ects yearly. Based upon the current staff available, it is projected
amendment is to delete certain exemptions for projects in that 1 engineering and 2 inspector positions will be required.
environmentally sensitive areas of the State's waterways. B. An estimated expense to other State and local agencies would
be based upon the time and material required to prepare permit
applications.
Estimate of Economic Impact C.1. Given an estimated increase in permit applications of 200
I. Summary of Economic Impact. Natural Resources Article, per year, an estimated project cost of $25,000, and an average appli-
�8-803, Annotated Code of Maryland, requires that any person cation preparation fee of 10 percent of the project cost.
wishing to change in any manner the course, current, or C.2. This cost is based on a minimum time to obtain a permit of
cross-section of any stream or body of water, first obtain a permit one month and interest of 12 percent per annum on an average
from the Department. Permits are obtained following the submittal project cost of $25,000.
of an application and accompanying documentation prescribed in C.3. This cost is based on a minimum time delay of 2 additional
COMAR. Regulations governing these activities have existed since months in permit processing time due to an expected 50 percent
the 1930's and have been amended from time-to-time in order to increase in the number of applications received. Also included is an
keep pace with goals and objectives of the Department of Natural average hearing notice publication cost of $100 per permit.
Resources. The regulatory changes proposed at this time are neces- D. Depending on the amount of detailed submittals required for
sarv in order to incorporate those items the General Assembly rec- a particular project, time delays will result to the construction in-
ognized as necessary in order to preserve and enhance the quality dustry. In addition, improper implementation of the construction
of the State's water resources as they relate to the Chesapeake Bay. drawings, which cannot be anticipated, can result in time delays to
the contractor.

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL. 14, ISSUE 6 FRIDAY, MARCH 13,1987

1-
111HIIIIIIIIIIIIII
@ 3 -6668 14103- 2807 1

-1-11--l'-.1 I @ @-