Strategy for Sawmill Creek restoration A targeted watershed project

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

STRATEGY FOR

QAWMILL CREEK

RESTORATION

A TARGETED WATERSBIED PROJECT

April, 1992

Prepared Cooperatively by:

Anne Arundel County
Maryland Department of Agriculture
Maryland Department of Environment
Maryland Department of Natural Resource@s
Maryland Governor's Office
Maryland Department of Transportation
Center for Policy Negotiation
Chesapeake Bay Trust
Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay
US Fish and Wildlife Service
National Marine Fisheries Service
Maryland Save-Our Streams
Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, UMS
Office of State Planning
Soil Conservation Service
Chesapeake Bay Foundation

WGM-TAR-92-1

CONTENTS

Acknowledgements

OVERVIEW

Scope and Organization of the Report

I. INTRODUCTION
A, Maryland's Targeted Watershed Project Description
B. Organization of the Sawmill Creek Project
C. Goal for the Sawmill Creek Watershed

II. DESCRIPTION OF SAINMILL CREEK WATERSHED
A. Geography
B. Whole Watershed Overview
1. Historic Conditions
2. Current Population, Land Uses and Land Cover
3. Future Development

III. EXISTING CONDITIONS: THE EFFECTS OF IAND USE ON THE
STREAM'S ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
k Segment 1 - Headwaters, Rural and Light. Residential
B. Segment 2 - Middle reach, Commercial and Light Industrial
C. Segment 3 - Lower reach, Developed, Residential, High Density

IV. COMMUNICATIONS AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
A. Efforts to Date
B. Current Focus: Adbpt-a-Stream
CA C. Future Plans
(10 V. CONCLUSIONS

VI. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OVERALL RESTORATION STRATEGY
k Segment 1 - Headwaters, Rural and Light Residential
B.. Segment 2 - Middle reach, Commercial and Light Industrial
C. Segment 3 - Lower reach, Developed, Residential, High Density

SI)

Appendices

1. Targeted Watershed Project Tasks

2. Project Organization Chart

3. Sawmill Creek Team Members

4. Sawmill Creek Work Groups

5. Ust of Affiliation (and other) Acronyms and their Definitions

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Page
Figure 1. Map of Maryland's Four Targeted Watersheds 2

Figure 2. Location Map of the Sawmill Creek Watershed 4

Figure 3. Transportation Corridors in the Sawmill Creek Watershed 6

Figure 4. Major Segments of the Sawmill Creek Watershed Categorized by 8
Predominant Land Use

Figure 5. New Development in the Plan Review Process 11

Figure 6. Baseflow and Ground-water Withdrawals 13

Figure 7. Change in Stream Channel Depth and Cross Section Due to 14
Erosion From 1955 to 1990

Figure 8. The Hydrologic Cycle 16

Table 1 Land Use Categories in the Watershed 10

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Sawmill Creek Targeted Watershed Project is the product of the effort and
good will of many people who are dedicated to the protection and restoration of Maryland's
environment. We extend our sincere appreciation to all of them'. Many of the people who
have been instrumental to, the project are members of the Restoration Planning team. Their
names are listed at the end of the report. We would also like to thank citizens who live in
the watershed and volunteer their time weekly to monitor the physical aspects of the stream.
The members of the Monitoring Team have made important contributions to our
understanding of the past and present conditions in the stream and the watershed.

Several people read drafts of this strategy and made helpful comments. They were Mike
Bowman, Stuart Lehman, Ginger Ellis, Ron Klauda, John McCoy, Barbara Johnson, Roland
Agbede, Richard C. Lucas, Robert James, Ronald A. Etzel, Dan Bard, Verna Harrison,
Susan Rudy, Rich Mason,, Beth Gotjen, Edward G. Stein and Rick Leader. Help with land
use analysis and statistics was provided by Fred Schenerman and Jim Ahl. We would like
to thank Lamar Platt and Mary Beamis for their help with the Figures.

Although many people reviewed this document, any errors are the responsibility of the
Project Leader and Project Coordinator.

OVERVIEW

The cumulative effects of traditional suburban/urban development patterns are
pervasive in the Sawmill Creek watershed. The environmental impacts are diverse in origin
and synergistic in their effects. Several system-wide management issues must be resolved
before most site-specific restoration projects' can be implemented effectively.

The following points summarize problems to beaddressed and the first steps to be
taken to solve them. More details are provided in the report text.

A. Water Quantity: The natural hydrology of Sawmill Creek and its tributaries has been
severely disturbed and needs to be rehabilitated to a more stable, natural stream condition.
This should be the first priority of the restoration process. lo,

1. High flows need to be controlled by the implementation of a regional
stormwater management plan. A cooperativine demonstration project by state
agencies on Muddy Bridge Branch is the first step.

2. Baseflow has been so severely reduced that parts of the stream have gone dry.
State and county water supply agencies need to coordinate with living resource
management agencies to develop a management plan that includes protection for
stream biota.

B. Water Quality:

1. Sediment loading in the Sawmill Creek watershed is primarily a function of
stream bed erosion. The stormwater management plan (A. 1.) must focus on reducing
erosive velocities within the stream channels.

2. Nutrient inputs are diverse and the relative contribution of nonpoint sources
needs to clarified. The monitoring team studies should focus on the sources of
nutrient and chemical contamination (B.3.).

3. Chemical pollution has a variety of sources, and some progress has been made
on managing the largest known source. A special work group should be assigned to
quantify and resolve the toxicity issues that have been raised by field investigations.
NPDES permit monitoring and enforcement need to be upgraded.

C. Habitat: Riparian buffer protection and stream channel restoration are needed.

1. A site-specific inventory of habitat problems and habitat enhancement
projects for the entire watershed is needed.
0 Citizen groups and the monitoring team could perform this task.

2. Fish passage improvement, stream channel stabilization and stormwater
management retrorits are being incorporated into current State construction projects.
These activities should be included in all new construction projects.

3. County rules protecting forests, streams and buffers could be consolidated into
one-document for easy reference. Currently they are dispersed throughout a number
of pieces of legislation, laws and ordinances.

D. Citizen involvement needs to be increased. The recently formed public participation
work group should focus on:

1. Park/trail linkages
2. Greenways program
3. Stewardship and public awareness

Scope and Organization of the Report

The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of existing environmental
conditions. in the watershed and to provide a strategy to prioritize the actions that can be
taken to improve the water quality and the habitat conditions' for living resources. The
environmental problems facing this watershed are diverse in origin and synergistic in effect.
The remediation of these problems will have to be accomplished by a number of different
organizations and groups who must integrate these tasks into their existing programs.
Details of specific restoration actions will be presented as a series of separate reports.
These reports will be developed by work groups composed of specialists from the whole
targeting team and other interested parties.'

The description of the existing environmental conditions draws on the.Sawmill Cree
Baseline Monitoring Report (Marshall, et al., 1992), a report that surnmarizes the data
collected by the Targeted Watershed Project. Additional information about the
environmental conditions in the watershed was provided by field observations made by the
Team members. and residents of the watershed. In 1986 Anne Arundel County
commissioned a report on the Sawmill Creek watershed for the purpose of evaluating a park
linkage system (Columbia Design Collective, Architects, Inc., December, 1986). Some of
the information contained in that report was used as background for this document.

This report begins with a brief description of the Maryland Targeted Watershed
Project. The second section contains a description of the geography, historic, current and
anticipated future conditions of the whole watershed. The third section expands the
description of the watershed, describes the subdivisions of the watershed as three major
segments based on the predominant land use and presents the main environmental problems
for each segment. The fourth section describes our communications and public information
efforts. The fifth section summarizes what has been learned about the watershed and how
the Targeted Watershed Project has evolved. The sixth section provides direction on how
to resolve the environmental problems in the three segments.

The appendix of the report contains background on the overall Targeted Watershed
Project and references to materials that are of project-specific and general interest.

I. INTRODUCnON'

0 A. Maryland's Targeted Watershed Project Description

The Targeted Watershed Project provides an opportunity for Chesapeake Bay
managers to develop, demonstrate and evaluate a coordinated approach to improving water
quality and the habitat conditions for living resources in four small watersheds, called
0 targeted watersheds (Figure 1). Through the implementation of various Bay cleanup
activities in the targeted watersheds, the project will demonstrate and help evaluate the
effectiveness of a number of the Chesapeake Bay Agreement commitments.

Curr ent regulator and management strategies address the impacts of individual
Y
0 projects. This project-by-project approach developed at a time when pressures on the Bay
from human activities were far less significant. T'his approach is no longer adequate to
protect or restore the tributaries or the Bay.

Many of the problems in the watersheds are from physical modifications to the
0 landscape, aquatic habitat destruction, and -nonpoint source pollution (NPS). NPS is the
pollution carried to waterbodies, by rain water runoff and atmospheric deposition. The
programs to address these sources of nonpoint source pollution involve actions by both
urban and agricultural organizations.

I
Inter-agency teams have determined the overall direction for the project work, based
on policy direction from the members of the Bay Workgroup. (The Bay Workgroup is a
committee of senior executives from environmental agencies.) Appendix One provides a
description of the major tasks of the overall Targeted Watershed Project. Appendix Two
contains a diagram of the project's organization.

B. Organization of the Sawmill Creek Project

For the Sawmill Creek watershed, two inter-agency teams have been responsible for
planning and. conducting the monitoring and restoration work. After the state agencies
began work on the Targeted Watershed Project, county and federal officials and
representatives from non-governmental organizations joined the teams. Some individuals
serve on both team . Five departments in Anne Arundel County government have been
involved in various capacities. Seven state departments are involved. Three federal
agencies, five non-govenamental organizations, several private citizens and local businesses
have been involved. Appendix Three provides an abbreviated list of the individuals who
0 have been involved with monitoring and restoration team work.

..........

Now York

Pennsylvenle

......... ...........
.......... ..........

. ....... .....
....... ........
Maryland

WON
Virginia .....

Chesapeake
Bay

Bird River
Baltimore County

Piney Alloway
Carroll County German Branch
Queen Anne's
County

Sawmill Crook
Anne Arundel County

Figure 1
Map of Maryland's Four Targeted Watersheds

C. Goal for the SawndU Creek Watershed

The overall goal for Sawmill Creek is simple to conceive and difficult to achieve.
The 2oal is to reverse the decline in water quali1y and- the loss of habitat. The first step has
been to understand the environmental conditions in the watershed and to identify the things
that create specific problems. At present we have a good general understanding of both the
conditions and the causes of the problems, and have begun to identify the important cause
and effect relationships. The intent of the Targeted Watershed Project is to start now to
create improvements in the watershed on the basis of existing information and our current
understanding of the problem. As we proceed, we will continue to expand our
understanding of causes md effects and use this knowledge to, help prioritize restoration
projects.

This document presents a synthesis of our analysis of the problems, an outline of the
work that is necessary to correct existing problems, and management steps that are required
to keep similar problems from being created by future development. Additional information
is available from several sources, including the Sawmill Cregk, Baseline Monitoring Repo
(Marshall, et al., 1992), the Project Leader's memos and reports on the project.

5ALTIMOF,,,e

IN,

Cwrti t,

A@,

IAC

J@ ILL
E K.

0 P"T r-1 a A, V F-
a

M T& PLIf

RF_S E P, VAT

OOW(E
@@NN- POU5
0 fk-T R

Figure 2
'Location Map of the Sawinill Creek Watershed

DESCRIPTION OF SAWMILL CREEK WATERSHED

A. Geography

Sawmill Creek is a, Coastal Plain watershed that drains approximately 5,000 acres, or
8.4 square miles. Sawmill Creek is a freshwater stream located in the northeastern part of
Anne Arundel County. 7be highest point in the watershed is near Severn Danza Park at
the intersection of Donaldson Avenue and Old Telegraph Road. The creek flows in a
northeasterly direction for about 5 miles until it joins Furnace Branch. The Furnace Branch
is an estuary that empties into Curtis Bay near the mouth on the Patapsco River. A location
map of the Sawmill Creek watershed is presented in Figure 2.

The soils in the watershed are sandy, highly permeable and very erodible. This is an
area of significant ground water recharge even though man made impervious surfaces, plus
the rapid elimination of surface runoff through storm drains has reduced total ground water
recharge within the watershed. Much of the rain that falls on this watershed infiltrates to
the ground water table and this water contributes to the baseflow of Sawmill Creek.
However, in recent years, ground water pumping has removed large amounts of ground
water from the watershed. and baseflows have decreased substantially. Formerly, this creek
had one of the highest baseflows per square mile of drainage area of any stream in the
region (U.S.G.S., 1973).

B. Whole Watershed Overview

The health of anystream is determined by the activities on the surrounding land that
comprises the watershed. Over the years the land uses in the Sawmill Creek watershed have
changed from forest to agrarian to urban.

1. Historic Conditions

The Creek derives its name from a water-driven sawmill that began operating in the
1700s. At that time mills were usually built close to the source of lumber. The remnants
of the sawmill dam are on the upstream end of the box culvert that carries 8th Avenue over
the creek. The impoundment created by this dam is known locally as Wagner's Pond.

Transportation corridors have played a major role in the development of this
watershed (Figure 3). This region was a very productive fruit and vegetable farming area
with roads and rail lines providing easy access to the markets. Most of the produce was sold
in Baltimore, which is one of the older port cities on the east coast. During the early 1900s
the local farms and industries relied on itinerant workers who had recently arrived in
Baltimore from Europe (Jacques, 1989).

4LEN O"RKIIF-
HOL-LiN6 FF_KR,@ RC).&,I)-

VA I-A

2 EE Al -r 0 \o%e
0

^1 WDKTH F ra ST

Figure 3
Transportation Corridors -in the SawmiR Creek
Watershed
6

In additionto links with Curtis Bay and the port of Baltimore, there were a number
of roads and railroads that connected Baltimore with points to the south. Ile precursors
of Mountain Road (now Route 100), Baltimore Annapolis Boulevard (Route 648) and Crain
Highway (Route 3) all converge in a part of the watershed that was known as WeHham's
Cross Roads in 1878. This is in the vicinity of Baltimore Washington International airport
(BWI). Trout were stock:ed in Sawmill Creek during the 1930s and 40s, because there was
a light rail commuter line that made Glen Burnie accessible to urban fishing enthusiasts
(Sunpaper, 1943).

Friendship Airport, now BWI, was built in the late 1940s. The airport was named
after the Friendship Methodist Church it replaced. The church had been located on the
highest place with relatively flat land close to the city and the port. At about the same time,
large scale subdivisions began to appear along Ritchie Highway as city workers began to
move away from the inner city. High density residential development has continued to fill
in the open land in Glen Burnie and Ferndale.

Regional groundwater withdrawals increased approximately 300% between 1965 and
1985. This was done to supply water to the growing population in northern Anne Arundel
County. As part of this new growth, pumpage was increased in several wen fields near the
mainstem of Sawmill Creek. During the same period the baseflow in Sawmill Creek
declined from 7.4 cubic fDet per second (cfs) to 0.98 cfs (Achmad, 1991).

2. Current Population, Land Uses and Land Cover

Initial estimates from the 1990 Census indicate that there are approximately 17,000
people living in the watershed. Certain tracts within this area have experienced growth rates
as high as 37% within the last 10 years. Based on historic growth patterns and current
zoning, the watershed can be divided into three general land use categories. These are
described briefly stdrting with the headwaters section and moving downstream (Figure 4 and
Table 1).

Most of the headwaters region of the creek@ segment # 1, is presently in rural and low
density residential uses. Almost the entire area is zoned R1 and R2. These zoning
classifications are intended to limit development to 1 or 2 residential units per acre.

The central third of the watershed, segment #2, is dominated by commercial and
light industrial uses. Most of the large tracts of existing open land are zoned W1 and W2,
which are defined as Parli Industrial development.

The lower third of the watershed is highly developed, and is characterized by small
lot subdivisions, with corrimercial development located along the highway corridors. The
majority of the land is zoned R5, C3 and C4. Most of the urbanization in this area took
place.in the 1940s and 50s. Although this area is generally referred to as Glen Burnie it
also includes parts of Ferndale.

5 E GMENT :3

FEF:;@NPALE
SEGMENT
Cornmeir6ai

5\A/'L

F-GMENT

Heta4walers, rural an4 I;j6J rr-s;4e-nT;aI

Trrrm"

0 S'LSO 5-aw,@,11 Cre*-k aKa t4utar;P-5
------------4
No AT HF Q ET

Figure 4
Major Segments of the SawmiR Creek Watershed
Categorized by Predominant Land Use
8

3. Future Development

Although most people would consider this region urbanized, there are a significant
number of land use changes still underway. In 1990 the Anne Arundel County Department
of Planning and Zoning was reviewing development plans that had been submitted for 69
new projects. These projects will alter an additional 14% of the watershed (figure 5). This
translates into a 32% reduction in the existing open space. Based on the most recent zoning
maps, the following land use developments are expected.

In the short term, the most obvious and dramatic changes are expected to occur in
segment 2, the central section of the watershed. Most of this change will occur along the
Dorsey Road/Route 100.md Route 3/197 corridors. As a consequence of expected intense
development, the Targeted Watershed Project initially focused much of the restoration
planning efforts in this segment.

Land use changes in the headwaters section, segment 1, should happen more
gradually. However, impacts on the watershed and the stream in this segment are harder
to predict. This is because waivers and special exceptions to zoning standards are granted
on a case by case basis.- 7[be construction of Route 100 and other road way improvements
may accelerate the rate of development in this area.

Although not many chaLige in land use are expected to occur in old Glen Burnie
segment 3, there are existing environmental problems that need to be addressed. These will
be discussed in later sections of this report.

Table I
Land Use in Sawmill Creek Watershed By Classification,
Segment and Acreage or Mileage
September, 1990

Segment Segment Segment Total
Land Use Classification 1 2 3 Acreage
Residential:
Low-Density (11)** 180 73 55 308
Medium-Density (12) 114 178 1002 1295
High-Density (13) 0 23 16 38
Commercial (14) 20 954 372 1346
Industrial (15) 67 18 85
Institutional (16) 20 20

Sub-Total (Developed) 314 1294 1484 3092

Open urban land (18) 47 34 50 132

Ag riculture:
Cropland (21) 211 137 5 354
Pasture (22) 1 1 2

Sub-Total (Agriculture) 212 137 7 356

Forest:
Deciduous (41) 188 186 71 445
Evergreen (42) 33 363 60 457
Mixed (43) 224 447 24 695
Brush (44) 23 6 30

Sub-Total (Forest) 445 1020 162 1626

Wetlands (60) 58 58

Barren:
Bare Ground (73) 79 7 86

TOTAL 1019 2564 1766 5350

Road Mileage 10.4 21.5 48.0 79.9

*Source: Data from MD Office of Planning
"Office of Planning Land Use Code Number

Sawmill Creek Watershed (5350 acres)
September, 1990

Under Plan Review
725 Acres
14%

W2 - Light Industrial 14% W1 B - Industrial 24%

....... .. .....
C - General
Commercial 4%

R1 - Residential 27%
R5 - Residential 19%

R2 - Residential 12%

Figure 5
New Development in Plan Review Process
Source:Anne Arundel County Planning and Zoning Office

III. EXISTING CONDITIONS: THE EFFECTS OF LAND USE ON THE STREAM'S
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
The following paragraphs provide an overview of the conditions currently found in
the three segments of the watershed. For more details on environmental data please see
the Sawmill Creek Baseline Monitoring ReRort (192J1. Land use data summarized in Table
1 is derived from the Maryland Office of Planning analysis of 1989 high altitude
photography.

A. SEGMENT 1: Headwaters, Rural and Light Residential

Segment 1 includes the areas upstream of monitoring stations 1 and 2.

Length: mainstem 1.4 miles, tributaries 2.1 miles

Drainage Area: 1018 acres (19% of the watershed)

Population: 1,893 (11% of the watershed)

Habitat Quality: Fair (based on reference streams)

Problems: Nutrient and bacteria concentrations are elevated in some areas.
Maintaining the integrity of the stream corridor and its vegetative
buffer during the construction on Route 100.

This segment is now characterized by a few subdivisions and a lot of relatively open
land with truck farms and some pig farms. Most of the stream corridor and floodplain are
wooded and in a relatively undisturbed condition. There are also significant areas of
wooded uplands. In contrast to the degree of urbanization in the rest of the watershed,
roughly 65% of this segment is agricultural or forested. The proximitry of some pig pens
to the stream has resulted in elevation of nutrient concentrations and high bacteria counts
at monitoring Station 1.

B. SEGMENT 2: Commercial and Light Industrial

Segment 2 encompasses the areas upstream of monitoring stations 3,4,5 and 6. The
boundaries of this segment are roughly defined by the new Route 100, 1 - 97. and BWI
airport.

Length: mainstem 2 miles, tributaries 7.1 miles

Area: 2564 acres, (48% of the watershed)

Population: 4679, (27% of the watershed)

Habitat Quality: Poor

lu
6

1965 1970 1975 1980 1985

15
14

10
L

C 13
0

E 13
(D 5

CL 13
E I
:3
0-

1945 1950 1955 1 9M 1985 1970 1975 1 9W 1 9S5

Yew

Figure 6
Baseflow and Ground-water Withdrawals
(Adapted from Achmad,1991)

52-

co 48

(D
(D
LL 46-
a %1955,,-

M 44
Muddy Bddge Branc
19841

1990

40
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Channel Width in Feet

vertical aids exaggerated

Figure 7
Change in Stream Channel Depth
and Cross Section Due. to Erosion
From 1955 to 1990

Problems: The hydrologic cycle has been so disrupted by urbanization that the
stream channel is unstable and the living resources are being
eliminated. There are also indications of chemical contamination that
could impact the stream biota at several sites.

Urban stormwater runoff, water withdrawals and construction of instrearn structures
have created problems with: reduced baseflow (figure 6), flooding, stream channel erosion
(figure 7), sedimentation, and turbidity. The cumulative impacts of these factors cause
losses of instrearn and riparian habitat and severely degrade the water quality during storm
events. Most of these environmental problems were caused by older development practices
that did not consider the intricate relationship between land use, the natural hydrologic cycle
(figure 8) and living resources within a stream system.

The largest concentration of municipal water supply wells is located in this segment.
Portions. of some tributaries that formerly were perennial streams now are dry almost every
summer.

The headwaters and most of the length of Muddy Bridge Branch is within this
segment. This tributary has been exposed to almost every type of impact that an urbanized
stream can experience. This subwatershed contains a large amount of government property
and a large number of current or impending construction projects within its boundaries.

Currently there are a variety of opportunities for the government agencies to
coordinate their regulator( and management actions in order to maximize stream restoration
activities on this tributary. For these reasons, the Muddy Bridge Branch subwatershed is the
focus of the first comprehensive restoration efforts described in later parts of this plan.

There is a large imarsh system on the mainstem of the creek above station 5.
Although this wetland is somewhat isolated from public view it provides significant water
quality benefits and wildlife habitat in this segment. Approximately 40% of segment 2 is
still forested.

C. SEGMENT 3 - Developed, Residential, High Density

Segment 3 encompasses the areas upstream of monitoring stations 7,8 and 9.

Length: mainstern 1.6 miles, tributaries 3.3 miles

Drainage Area: 1766 acres, (32% of the watershed)

Population: 10,569, (62% of the watershed)

Habitat Quality: Fair in the mainstem, poor in the tributaries

Problems: Instream impacts are the 'same as segment 2, however the problem
sources are more diverse.

Rain Cloud

i@F Evaporation
wride tailin2.
Precipitation Cloud Formation

Evapor tion

co
t
Surface r 01
E t
Infiltration 0 a

Water Table

Saturated Zone

Frean Ground Water
00 'Psalt Ocean
I Water
Confining Bed

After Johnson, 1975.

Figure 8
The Hydrologic Cycle
a

RNOT

This segment is characterized by high density, small lot subdivisions and commercial
strips along the major roadways. These were built before the current environmental
0� regulations were in place. There is little remaining open land; less than 10% of the segment
is forested.

The headwaters ofthese sub-watersheds have been paved over and the upper parts
of the tributaries have been converted into storm drains under the streets. The stream
channels are being severely impacted by uncontrolled storrawater runoff from the storm
drains in the upper reaches. There is some riparian vegetation remaining in the ravines that
were too steep to be developed. There are indications that the surviving aquatic conununity
is being stressed by-chemical contaminants.

The most significant natural feature of this segment is Wagner's Pond, with its 40
acres of contiguous marshes and forested wetlands. 'Ibis is the site of the original sawmill
dam.

IV. COMMUNICATIONS AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

From the outset of the Targeted Watershed Project, the active involvement of citizens
has been basic to the success of the effort. This section provides a summary of
communications efforts to raise public awareness and enlist citizen involvement.

A. Efforts to Date

To date, public communications have focused on six areas:

1. Informing the local public about the targeted watershed project through press
coverage and a brochure.

2. Enlisting citizen water7quality monitors. A team of monitors, originally under the
direction of the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, has been monitoring nine sites
along the creek since the fall of 1989.

3. Identifying opportunities for, and facilitating, restoration projects. With the
cooperation of Anne Arundel County, watershed, park, and stream cleanups have
been undertaken at public parks in the spring and fall of 1990 and 199 1. (In addition,
storm drains throughout the watershed were painted with "Dorf t Dump, Chesapeake
Bay Drainage" as part of an individual Eagle Scout project).

4. Outreach to special local groups (e.g., Glen Burnie Improvement Association,
Sawmill Creek Watershed Association, Pascal Senior Center), informing them of
special projects--e.g., citizen monitoring needs and enlisting their support.

5. Directly assisting citizens experiencing problems in the watershed (e.g.,
Meadowbrook Road area erosion problems).

6. Public recognition of citizen efforts. In June 1991, the Sawmill Citizen monitors
were presented with Governor's Citation awards for their monitoring work.

B. Current Focus: Adopt-a-Stream

In. July 1991, Maryland Save Our Streams received a $20,000 grant from the
Chesapeake Bay Trust (CBT), for a one-year project to launch a public education campaign
in the watershed. The CBT sum was to be supplemented by $10,000 in SOS funds, for a
total of $30,000. Save Our Stream's "Adopt-a-Stream" campaign, sponsored by the
Department of Natural Resources, provides the project framework, and involves the
following activities:

1. Slide show and educational materials:

Workshop series brochure. Includes a brief overview of the history and current
problems of the watershed, and outlines the citizen workshop series planned by SOS
to educate and involve citizens of the watershed through presentation of specific
adoption activities.
"Numbers to Know" door hanger. Local and state environmental telephone numbers
to report problems or acquire information.
"Six Simple Steps to Restoring Your Neighborhood Stream." This flyer raises
awareness of homeowner impacts on local streams by listing six household best
management practices.

2. Community outreach: Workshop series on Adopt-a-Stream acitivies. Workshops
will focus on storrawater management, sediment control, water-quality monitoring,
watershed surveys. Ongoing, from November, 1991 through Spring, 1992.

C. Future Plans
0 In addition to continuing all ongoing efforts and moving forward with the stream
adoption campaign, communication plans include:

1. Public information signs for park areas.

4P 2. Ongoing efforts to highlight project milestones and successes in local press outlets.

3. Investigating the possibility of having SHA road signs identifying Sawmill Creek
on all,major arteries crossing the Creek (e.g., 1-97, Business 3, Route 2).

4. Identify appropriate projects for citizen involvement in specific restoration efforts
recommended by the technical teams. These projects could include litter, trash and
pet waste control and the revegetation of open lands.

V. CONCLUSIONS

This document provides an overview of the problems and a general strat Ieg y for
restoration efforts. Ile most obvious problems will be addressed first but the specific
restoration tactics will be developed later as separate work plans. This means that the
targeting team will be transformed into a number of working groups with overlapping
memberships. These groups will be responsible for specific restoration plans. Inter-
disciplinary communications should be maintained by this approach.

Examples of existing work. groups include: Stormwater Management, Instrearn Flow
and Water Supply, and Public Participation (see membership lists in the Appendix).
Additional work groups will focus on toxics and. future development.

The following paragraphs describe the major conclusions about the present environmental
conditions in the Sawmill Creek Watershed:

1. Environmental impacts to living resources result from the cumulative effects of many
human activities over time in the watershed. Although it is difficult to isolate the magnitude
of each cause and effect relationship between human activity and environmental impact,
some important relationships have been identified. Prioritization in the restoration strategy
relies on our understanding (whether general or specific) of these cause and effect
relationships.

2. Identification and prioritization of restoration. projects is an ongoing task. Initial
restoration plans will be based on the current data base and understanding of the processes
at work in the watershed. As our experience with restoration projects grows, this knowledge
will be used to target subsequent project efforts.

3. Each sub-watershed segment is unique. Approaching the watershed as a whole system
provides a logical way to try to protect and restore water quality and habitat for living
resources. Partitioning the watershed into three major segments based on geography and
land use makes the work more, manageable. It is essentialthat the specific restoration
projects be planned and built within the perspective of managing the whole watershed.

4. Segment 2 has received the most detailed attention because it has the most obvious
environmental problems and it will continue to be the location of the most development and
change. It also presents the greatest oppo 'rtunities, for protection and restoration efforts.
Restoration techniques that are successful in any segment will be adapted for use in the
other segments.

5. Many urban watershed restoration projects place the majority of project resources into
actions to abate and control stormwater runoff. This is a logical approach, since it is
possible to correct a number of problems at the same time. We have found this to be a

good starting point for the restoration efforts in Segments 2 and 3, while keeping in mind
the overall goals of water quality and habitat improvement.

It should be pointed out that large stormwater management structures are only part
of the restoration picture. A mix of innovative stormwater control techniques and habitat
improvements must also be considered here. It is too easy to think that a problem is solved
just by spending a lot of time and money on concrete and steel.

6. In Sawmill Creek, sediment transport is the main functional link between the hydrologic
regime (water quality) and the physical structure of the stream channel (physical habitat)..
Erosion and sedimentation patterns are also controlled by the presence of structures
(culverts, channels, etc.) in the stream. In order to effectively alter any one of these factors,
all must be considered in concert.

7. Habitat conditions and living resources were among the first indicators assessed in order
to establish the stream's health and vitality. Living resources numbers are depressed and
their habitat is less diverse than would be found in a less impacted stream. The goal of the
project is to increase both the numbers and diversity of species of fish and benthic organisms
by improving the habitat and, water quality. The -success of restoration efforts for Sawmill
Creek will be measured b, the results of periodic comparisons of the habitat and the aquatic
biota as the restoration projects are implemented.

8. The information sharing by the Targeted Watershed Project Team Members has
identified and started to correct some of the gaps in the environmental management of this
watershed.* The resource protection agencies can provide guidance for a holistic approach
to restoration efforts. The agencies with operational responsibilities can expect advice and
support for work that is consistent with the goals of restoring and protecting the living
resources of the whole watershed.

*Examples of the environmental improvements -that are attributable to targeting team
communications. (This work has preceded any formal restoration projects):

0 Water supply managers were unaware of the impacts of significant ground-
water purnpage and the resulting reduced baseflow impacts on the stream
biota. They have now agreed to consult with living resource agencies on a
strategy to restore baseflow.

0 Provisions for fish passage and stream channel stabilization are now being
incorporated into five current highway widening designs.

0 Stormwater management and wetlands creation designs are being added to a
road widening project. MAA and SHA will share mitigation credits and cost
reduction benefits.

0 Waterway construction projects are now incorporating better designs for low-
flow conditions which are critical for stream biota. Traditionally the review
of construction projects has focused on reducing flooding risks to human
property.

0 Fish and invertebrate surveys and field bioassays have identified several
sources of chemical contamination that are probably reducing the diversity of
the instrearn biota.

0 Laboratory research has determined that the environmental impact of two
industrial chemicals used in the watershed has been significantly
underestimated by the federal regulatory agencies.

0 NPDES discharge permits for several businesses have been revised and
upgraded in order to reduce point source discharges.

0 County planners now consult with team biologists when reviewing the
environmental impacts of zoning waiver requests.

VI. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OVERALL RESTORATION STRATEGY

During the first ye ar of the project there were a number of meetings of the entire
targeting team. One of the main purposes of those meetings was to share information on
environmental problems in the watershed. Another purpose was to clarify areas of
responsibility and to identify gaps in our environmental management structure. During the
second year of the project, the meetings have been smaller with the emphasis on resolution
of specific issues that involve only some of the specialists on the team. This section provides
a strategic overview of the restoration plans, for each of the sub-watershed seginen.ts.
Detailed restoration actions will be presented in the site-specific plans developed by the
targeting team work groups.

Environmental problems in the watershed generally fall into one of three categories:
water quantity; water quality; or habitat degradation (instream or riparian). The restoration
strategy will have a different emphasis in each one of the three segments. The focus in each.
segment will depend on the special conditions in that area. While many issues are being
addressed simultaneously, a natural prioritization of efforts has developed. Tbere is a
consensus that water quantity, including both high and low flow issues, must be stabilized
before water quality and habitat problems can be more completely resolved. Most of the
water quantity issues are presented in the discussion on segment 2, but that discussion of
the quantity problems is relevant to the whole Sawmill Creek watershed.

The Targeted Watershed Project has fostered considerable informal communication
among the team members. The "networking" of the team members will be an important
part of future implementation projects.

A. SEGMENT 1: Headwaters, Rural and Light Residential

In terms of environmental protection, the intensity of development impacts is reduced
.somewhat by low-density R1 & R2 zoning and by the increased environmental protection
afforded by the current regulations. The most serious issues to be addressed are:

1. Maintain adequate stream buffers that extend all the way to the headwaters of each
tributary.

2. Maintain existing lowdensity rural character by minimizing changes to the zoning rules
that currently protect the environment.

0 3. Adhere to the stormwater management -goals of protecting water quality as well as
controlling water quantity in new development projects. 71is would not preclude innovative
stormwater management techniques.

4. Identify and develop agricultural soil conservation and water quality plans for nutrient
management and water quality protection through the use of Maryland Agriculture Cost-
Share Program (MACS) that provides grants to farmers. Vigorously promote BMP
implementation, and implement stream habitat rehabilitation where appropriate.

5. Minimize the construction impacts of Route 100 by strict adherence to new sediment
control guidelines.

Most of these issues are primarily the responsibility of various agencies within Anne,
Arundel County Government, but MDA, MDE, SCS, MDOT and DNR can provide support
for these actions.

Lead agencies: Anne Arundel County, SCD, CES, MDA

B. SEGMENT 2: Middle Reach, Commercial and Light Industrial

While there are a variety of organizations responsible for stream protection,
restoration, and enhancement in this segment of the Sawmill Creek watershed, the State of
Maryland should take the lead, because it is one of the largest landowners and developers
in this segment of the watershed.

The consensus of the Targeted Watershed Project is that the first priority must be
the restoration of a more natural hydrologic cycle. As part of this restoration process, both
water quality and quantity issues must be addressed. Quality and quantity issues can not be
completely separated, but are listed individually below in order to clarify the topics to be
covered.

1. Water Quantity - episodic high flow problems

As a first step, a regional Stormwater Management Plan should be completed and
implemented for the Muddy Bridge Branch tributary. The Maryland Aviation
Administration has already contributed to the team's@ efforts by allocating funds to their
consulting engineers to prepare a report that summarizes the current conditions and
problems on Muddy Bridge Branch (Greiner, Inc. 1991). The Greiner report helps clarify
the range of stormwater management issues that need to be addressed in the regional
restoration plan.

The Sediment and Stormwater Administration (MDE) is currently drafting the
criteria for a regional stormwater management (SWM) plan for the Muddy Bridge Branch.
This will be an innovative initiative that will incorporate water quality and habitat
restoration, as well as flood protection for the entire sub-watershed. As the plan for this
tributary is refined, it can be used as a guide for resolving stormwater management
problems on a whole watershed basis. The major design criterion will be to coordinate and
control all SWM facilities so that discharges will -not cause excessive stream channel erosion.

Lead agencies: MDE, MDOT, DNR, Anne Arundel County

2. Water Quantity - stream baseflow problems

Research by DNR and Anne Arundel County has determined that stream baseflow
has been significantly reduced by extensive ground water pumpage in this watershed
(Achmad, 1991). Baseflow must be restored in order to protect the living resources -and to
reduce the magnitude of change between baseflow and stormflow, which has implications
for stream geomorpholo@y. This work will require the implementation of. a coordinated
management plan that involves actions by both the state and county.

In order to restore baseflow a water budget for present and projected conditions will
have to be developed and implemented. This budget would be a management tool that
provides water users with a way to assess the relative importance of all the elements that
affect water quantity. It should include the following elements:

a. minimum stream flow requirements for living resources
b. water demand, including withdrawal rates from the different aquifers
C. net water losses through sewer system export
d. changes in ihfiltration and recharge rates, with an emphasis on the effects of
increases in. impervious surfaces and stormwater management
e. regional water supply network
f. water conservation and other alternatives
provisions for a shared data base for continuing management of water supply
issues

Some of the work on baseflow restoration is already in progress. A range of instrearn
flow values for living. resources has been developed by a work group of the Targeted
Watershed Project, and TVIGS has refined some of the techniques that it uses to forecast the
effects of water withdrawals on stream flow. A well head protection program is also in the
planning stages and this could provide useful information for the water management plan.

Lead agencies: DPM (WRA, MGS, TID), Anne Arundel County, MDE, FWS

3. Water Quality Issues

Problems that are being addressed include:

a. sediments
b. nutrients
C. toxic contaminants

Sediment loading in this system is primarily due to stream bed and channel erosion,
caused by excessive stormwater runoff. Most of this problem must be addressed by reducing
the frequency and duration of flows that exceed the erosive velocity of the stream channel.
This reduction in peak flows is the primary criterion of the stormwater

management plan discussed in #1 above. Monitoring and enforcement of erosion control
practices at construction sites is also an important requirement for sediment reduction.

Nutrients in this watershed come from a variety of nonpoint sources. A nutrient
reduction strategy is dependent on a quantitative description of the sources. The Monitoring
Team's reports will provide more details on the areas of most significant nutrient
contribution.

Several sources of chemicals that are potentially damaging to the stream biota are
being investigated by the Targeted Watershed Project. A work group will have to quantify
sources of problems, instrearn effects and export rates of pollutants. In contrast to the plan
development approach of the previousitems, this will primarily be an investigative process
driven by field observations. An important part of the monitoring program is the ability to
do bioassays in the field. The DNR has a mobile laboratory that can help isolate the
sources of some water quality problems. Better coordination between monitoring and
regulatory agencies is already being developed.

Lead agencies: DNR, MDE, Anne Arundel County

4. Habitat for Living Resources

Habitat for living resources depends first of all on a stable, more natural stream
hydrology. After stream hydrology is addressed, a basin-wide plan for habitat restoration
can be refined. Potential restoration mechanisms include: bank stabilization; riparian buffer
management; reforestation; fish passage; instream habitat structures; and wetlands
replacement. This habitat restoration would involve work at both new construction and
mitigation sites. Some of these techniques are already being incorporated into existing
individual development plans. A good example of current work is the stabilizing of culvert
outfalls and providing for fish passage at several of the 15 highway stream crossings that are
currently being designed or constructed.

Although some specific habitat problems are already being addressed there are
several steps that can be taken to identify and prioritize habitat restoration projects:

0 Citizen monitors report erosion and water quality problems that they observe.
Save Our Streams could schedule training sessions for stream inventories that
will cover the watershed.
0 Water quality sampling by DNR (both routine and storm events) provides
information on problems.

The EPA rapid bioassessment method has been used by the monitoring team several
times to quantify and compare habitat conditions in different parts of the watershed, and
at reference sites on relatively undisturbed streams. This methodology is particularly useful
because it is a consistent way to rate the relative magnitude of a habitat problem and it can
provide insight as to what kind of restoration Work is needed.

Lead agencies: DNR, MDOT, FWS, Anne Arundel County

C. SEGMENT 3 - Developed, Residential, High Density

Many of the plans developed for segment 2 would be appropriate for segment 3,
particularly those relating to stormwater management. However, the availability of land and
funding sources is more limited in segment 3. In order to make the best use of existing
resources the following strategy is suggested.

1. Divide segment 3 into short stream reaches (such as sections between road
crossings) and inventory problems.
2. Quantify magnitude of problems on each stream reach.
3. Identify all possible restoration alternatives.
4. Prioritize alternatives based on expected stream improvements.

Based on existing knowledge of segment 3, the tributary behind the Glen Burnie
Industrial Park (Station 9) would be the first target for stormwater management retro-fits
and more detailed toxic testing.

Since the largest percentage of residents live in this portion of the watershed, this
would be a prime area for public education and participation projects. The existing parks
and woods and wetlands around Wagner's Pond offer many opportunities for public
involvement. Anne Arundel County already owns or controls more than 40 acres around
the pond. A boardwalk and interpretive trail along the pond could be developed. The
county is also acquiring easements on many of the floodplains in the watershed.

The Anne Arundel County Department of Parks and Recreation has been working
with MDOT on trails that will connect existing recreation facilities in and outside of the
watershed. A master plan that highlights the stream system would enhance public awareness
of the aquatic ecology and the linkage to the Bay. T'his watershed appears to be an ideal
location for a Gree'nways project.

Lead Agencies: Anne Arundel County, MDE, DNR,. CBT, SOS

References:

Achmad, G. 1991. Simulated hydrologic effects of the Patapsco aquifer system in Glen
Burnie, Anne Arundel County, Maryland. 90p.

Anne Arundel County. 1986. Sawmill Creek Watershed Management Plan. Prepared by
Columbia Design Collective, Architects, Inc.

Anne Arundel County Code. Article 21 Title 3 Subtitle 2 Section 3-202,c3,ii

Anne Arundel County Tax Map, 1878

Brugger, Robert J. 1988. Maryland: A Middle Temperament, 1634 - 1980. Johns Hopkins
University Press.

Evening Sunpaper. Feb 25, 1943, Baltimore, Maryland.

Johnson, E.E. 1975 (for hydrologic cycle diagram) as seen in The quantity and natural
quality of ground water in Maryland. 1987. Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis,
MD.

Kelly, Jacques, 1989. Anne Arundel County: A Pictorial History. The Do i g
Company/Publishers 5659 Virginia Beach Boulevard, Norfolk, VA 23502

Marshall, D., S. Lehman, J. McCoy, F. Paul, John Christmas, D. Jordahl, M. Haddaway,
N. Primrose. April, 1992. Sawmill Creek, Baseline Monitoring Report. October 1989
September 1990. Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD.

Maryland Aviation Administration. April 1991. Muddy Bridge Branch Report: Stormwater
and Erosion Issues. Prepared for Sawmill Creek Targeting Project by Greiner, Inc.

United States Geological Survey. 1973. Professional Paper 822. Water Resources of the
Delmarva Peninsula.

APPENDIX ONE

OVERVIEW OF THE TARGETED WATERSHED PROJECT TASKS

Task 1. Develop Plan: Completed

Develop working plans for the overall project and for the separate watersheds. The
strategy of using multi-agency, multi-disciplinary teams to conduct the project work was
agreed upon, and initial recruitment and criteria development for choosing watersheds. was
begun.

Task 2. Recruit and Build Teams: Completed.

identify, contact and obtain commitments from appropriate professionals to form the
project teams. In each watershed there are monitoring and restoration team . Some
individuals work on both monitoring and restoration, and some individuals work on all four
watersheds. Each watershed restoration team has a Project Leader and a person who has
the lead responsibility for communications tasks.

Task 3. Select Watersheds: Completed.
Criteria for evaluating candidate watersheds were developed and applied. Figure 2,
on page 2, presents a map of Maryland showing the general location of the four targeted
watersheds. The followffig list gives the county and predominant land uses of the four
selected watersheds. A discussion of the principal reasons these watersheds were chosen
is included at the beginning of the discussion of each watershed.

Sawmill Creek - jknne Arundel Countv. Land uses: Mixed: urban, residential,
commercial, light industrial, and transportation.
Bird River - Baltimore Co Land uses: Mixed: urban, residential, commercial,
surface mining, light industrial, and transportation.
German Branch - Oueen Anne's Coun Land uses: agricultural.
Pingy/Allgyay Cr -.ek - Carroll Cou Land uses: agricultural.

Task 4. Conduct 113aselini Monitoring.- Ongoing.

Monitoring has grown in importance, intensity and complexity as the project
progresses. The purpose of the baseline monitoring work is to determine present conditions
in the watersheds, identi@, environmental problems, and provide the basis for evaluating the
effects of restoration and management actions.

Citizen volunteers have supplemented the monitoring work of the agencies in each
of the four watersheds. Citizen involvement is being funded by DNR and coordinated by
the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay in three of the watersheds. In the Bird River
watershed, Save Our Streams and Baltimore County have an ongoing citizen monitoring
project that will be the framework of the citizen work there.

Task 5. Restoration: Being Planned and Implemented.

The purpose of the restoration work is to improve the water quality and habitat
conditions for living resources in these four watersheds. Factors that have degraded the
environment have been and will continue to be systematically identified. Existing programs
that are designed to address these problems have been identified. Watershed restoration
requires aMulti-agency and multi-disciplinary approach to analyzing, planning and carrying
out environmental management and restoration.

Implementing restoration actions is not a static, linear or "one time only' process.
Findings from the monitoring and from on-site evaluations of watershed conditions guide
the watershed restoration work.

Task 6. Communication: Ongoing.

The communications tasks serve two functions, one internal and one external. First,
frequent interagency communications in the form of formal and informal meetings and
correspondence are part of the routine operations of the monitoring and restoration teams.
Secondly,communications with the public will help develop stewardship and awareness of
their individual watersheds by providing background information about watersheds, the goals
of this project, periodic updates on the project's progress and to.describe opportunities for
environmental protection and stewardship activities.

Tasks 7. Review and Evaluate: Complete for 1990.

A record of the first year of the overall activities for the targeted watershed project
is summari d in an overview report. A separate report is being prepared on the findings
from the monitoring work. Evaluation and review will continue to be important to maintain
continuity within the project and to provide comparative information.

APPENDIX IWO

Project Organization Chart

FUNCTIONS ORGANIZATIONAL (with lines ofril Iblillyandco"minication)

Policy guidance Bay Worlegroup Bay Communications Werlegroup
and oversight Governors Office, OSP Governors Office, OSP, MDA,
Commitment .1 MDA. MOE, DNR, UMS-CEES MOE. ONR. umS-CEES, Aces. cerr
agency

Project design,
planning, recruitment Coordinator Bartholomew, CPN
coordination, Adminstrator( Lehrman, ONR
communication and
administration.

Watershed-spocific
leadership for Sawmill Crook German a Inch PlnoV/Allow*V Bird R IV r
monitoring, Project Loader Project Loader Project Loader Project L*:dar
Implementation, Lubbers, DNR Opel, MDA lard. MDA
and evaluation.

Design and carry out Manitarin(L. Monitoring Horittartna
monitoring in the Anne Arundel County: Carroll Countw ftle.1more County:
watersheds and - Planning end Zoning MbA, MOE, DNR - Water Resources - Enviraninental Protection
reference streams. - Public Works ACB,USFW *S, USGS MOA. MOE. OFIR, and Resource Managemen'
Determine baseline - Utilities Smithsonian ACa. USFWS. USGS MDA, MOE. DNR. OSP
- Community Sm"cas ACB. SOS, USFWS, USGS
conditions. Provide MDA. MDE. DNR. GO,
analysis of date. AC5. USIFWS. Uses

identify causes of Restoration Tearn Restoration Team
problems, resources Anne Arundol C*MtW Carroll Cowtir aillumore Countyr
to solve, develop Planning and Zonim MDA, SCS. SCD' CES. - Water Resources - En"rovirmentall Protectl w
and evaluate Lp Public Works. Utilities, ASCS, MOE. DNR. 60. MOA, SCS. SCO. CES. and Resvi 0 Monagel Still
alternative protection Comrounity Services Queen ANWO County ASCS. MDE. DNR, GO. ACII MDA, MOE. MR. 60, OSP
and restoration MDA. MDE. MR. 60. OSP. Planning, Ace SOS. Ace
actions. ACD. USFWS;

Oartholornew. 3 90.
r

Restoration TERM Rmittarn

APPENDIX THREE

Sawmill Creek Restoration Planning Team
May, 1992

Anne Arundel County Telei)hone Fax

Seymour Bayuk (Utilities) 222-7500
Meo Curtis (P & Z) 222-7441 222-7492
Ginger K Ellis (Planning)(AA Coordinator) 222-7441 222-7492
Ron Etzel (Public Works) 222-7028 266-7427
Pam Jordan (Community Services) 222-1530
Tolly Peuleche (Rec & Parks) 222-3533 222-3453

MDA Dan Bard (SCA, Piney/Alloway) 694-9290 694-2618
Jeff Opel (SCD, QA, German Branch) 758-3L36 758-3687
Rowland Agbede (ORC) 841-5806

MDE Barbara C. Johnson (PEMO) (Communications) 631-3003 631-3936
John McCoy (WMA, CBP) 631-3681 631-3873
Ken Pensyl (S&SA) 631-3557 631-4883
Mark Daly (S&SA) 631-3566 631-4883

kNR Terry Clark (WRA) 974-3675 974-2618
Michael Bowman (WGM) 974-3151 974-2600
Ron Klauda (CBRM) 974-3782 974-3770
Stuart Lehman (WGM) 974-5780 974-2600
Larry Lubbers (WGM, Project Leader) 974-2671 974-3770
Dick Lucas (WRA) 974-3675 974-2618
Gary Setzer (WRA) 974-3675 974-2618
Ann Sloan (Greenways) 974-3654

GO Cecily Majerus 974-3004 974-3435
Eleanor G. Falk 974-5300 974-3275

MDT Barbara Grey (MAA, OP&E) 859-7090 859-5440
Ed Stein (SHA, OCE) 333-1045
Steve Lucchesi & Susan Rudy (Greiner) 561-0100 561-1150
Missy Drissel (MDOT, OPPA) 859-7934 859-7933

MOP Joe Tassone 225-4562 225-4480

University - CEES
Wayne Bell 228-9250 228-3843

Federal Aaencles
Tim Hall (USFWS) 224-2732 224-2781
Rich Mason (USFWS) 224-2732 224-2781
Jim Wist (SCDAACo) 222-7822
John Nichols (NMFS) 226-5771

Other Omanizations
Joy Bartholomew (CPN) 855-1876 586-9226
Lynn CegeLski (ACB, citizen monitor) 760-5776
Kathleen Ellett (ACB) 267-0061 or 0152 267-0292 or 0918 A
Jonathan Pearson (SOS) 969-0138 or 0084 969-0135 *k
Mike Hirshfield (CBF) 268-8816,
Richard R. Leader (CB Trust) 974-2941 269-0387
Rick MacDonald (ACB, Citizen Monitor) 760-7355
Robert Ryan (Balt. Co. DEPRM, Bird River) 887-2904
A

APPENDIX FOUR

Sawmill Creek Stormwater Management Sawmill Creek Public Participation
Work Group Work Group

AA Co AA Co
Ginger K. Ellis (Planning) Ginger K. Ellis (Planning)
Ron Etzel (Public Works) Pam Jordan (Comm. Services)
MDE Tolly Peuleche (Rec. & Parks)
John McCoy (WMA, CBP) MDA
Ken Pensyl, Mark Daly Rowland Agbede (ORC)
and Dan O'Leary (S&SA) MDE
DNR Barbara C. Johnson (PEMO)
Larry Lubbers (WGM) Betty Myers (PEMO)
Ken Yetman (WGM) DNR
David Walbeck (WRA, NTW) Stuart Lehman (WGM)
Margie Whilden (WPik, NTW) Larry Lubbers (WGM)
Ross Beschner (WRA, FPM) Amn Sloan (Greenways)
MDOT GO
Barbara Grey (MAA, DP&E) Cecily Majerus
Ed Stein (SHA, OCE) Eleanor G. Falk
Susan Rudy (Greiner, Inc) Federal Agencies
Jim Gracie (Brightwater Consultants) Rich Mason (USFWS)
Kirk McClelland (SHA) Jim Wist (SCD, AACo)
Linda Kelbaugh (SHA') Other Organizations
Paul Wiebke (SHA) Joy Bartholomew (CPN)
Federal Agencies Kathleen Ellett (ACB)
Tim Hall (USFWS) Lynn Cegelski (ACB, citizen
Jim Wist (SCID;, AACo) monitor)
Other Organizations Richard R. Leader (CB Trust)
Jack Pickwoad (McCrone) Jonathan Pearson (SOS)
Cecily Majerus (GO) Mike Hirshfield (CBF)
Missy Drissel (MDOT.,'OPPA)

Sawmill Creek Instream Flow & Water Supply Work Group

AA Co
Ginger K. Ellis
DNR Meo Curtis
Larry Lubbers
Stu Lehman
Terry Clark
Richard Lucas
Fred Mack
MDE
John McCoy
MDOT
Barbara Grey
Ed Stein
Federal Agencies
Tim Hall

APPENDIX FIVE

ACRONYMS

ACB, - Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay
ASCS - Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service
BMP - Best Management Practice
CBRM - Chesapeake Bay Research and Monitoring
CBT - Chesapeake Bay Trust
CES - Cooperative Extension Service
CEES - Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies
CPN - Center for Policy Negotiation
DEPRM - Department of Environmental and Resource Management, Baltimore County
DNR - Department of Natural Resources
EPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency
FP&W - Forest Parks and Wildlife Administration
GO - Governor's Office
MACS - Maryland Agricultural Cost Share Program
MDA - Maryland Department of Agriculture
MDE - Maryland Department of Environment
MES - Maryland Environmental Service
MAA - Maryland Aviation Administration
MBB - Muddy Bridge Branch
NMFS - National Marine Fisheries Service
ORC - Office of Resource Conservation
OSP - Office of State Planning
PEMO - Public Education and Media Office
PPER - Power Plant and Environmental Review
SCD - Soil Conservation District
SC&E - Small Creeks and Estuaries Program
SCS - Soil Conservation Service
SHA - State Highway Administration
SOS - Save Our Streams
SSA - Sediment and Stormwater Administration
SWM - Stormwater Management
UMS-CEES - University of Maryland System - Center for Environmental and Estuarine
Studies
USFWS - United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS - United States Geological Survey
WRA - Water Resources Administration
WMA - Water Management Administration

The Targeted Watershed Project is a multi-disciplinary project to demonstrate stream
restoration and watershed protection methods in selected small watersheds in Maryland.
The Maryland Governor's Office, Department of Natural Resources, Maryland Department
of the Environment, Maryland Department of Agriculture, Maryland Office of Planning,
County Governments, Federal agencies, citizens and businesses are cooperating partners in
the project.

Printed by

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .

14-

Printed on Recycled Paper

NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY

I
1

3 6668 14111750 9 ,