scoping gear line change for patent tonging: patuxent river … … · working meeting with dr....

SCOPING Gear Line Change for Patent Tonging: Patuxent River

What is being considered? The department is considering revising the patent tong line in the Patuxent River. Two areas, approximately 8

and 25 acres, will be added to allow for patent tongs.

The maps show the patent tong harvest area in gold color. The areas being added are circled in red. The first

area is between the shore and Neal Addition Sanctuary (Note: the boundary of the sanctuary will not change).

The second area is offshore of the Navy Recreation Center, but some shoreline setback will still occur due to

Navy requirements. Why is this change necessary? The department has received a request to change the patent tong line in the lower third of the Patuxent River to

include two small areas of oyster bottom. The areas described are currently open to harvest by hand tong and by

diving. By creating a new line, patent tonging will be allowed in these two small areas. Who will this affect? Commercial and recreational oyster harvesters When will this be effective? The department expects this change to be effective September 2020, however the exact date cannot be

determined. The department will follow our normal scoping and proposal procedures.

Area shoreward of Neal Addition Sanctuary:

Area offshore of the Navy Recreation Center, but some shoreline setback will still occur due to Navy requirements:

Proposed OAC Timeline for 2020

April 141:

● Final discussion and vote on the guidelines for the OAC

● Presentation by Dr. Wilberg and Dr. North

○ OysterFutures model overview

○ Predictive model and the larval transport model overview

May 11:

● Review the Manokin draft blueprint

● Planning and discussion for the site visits/public meetings

● Finalize agreed upon goals of the OAC

June 8:

● Review of the stock assessment + current year data results

○ Review how this data will feed into the FMP simulation model

● Scope regs for the next oyster season

● Review draft of interim report (due August 1, 2020 -- date subject to change)

● Finalize plan for site visits/public meetings

July 13:

● Working meeting with Dr. Wilberg and Dr. North

● Finalize draft of interim report (due August 1, 2020 -- date subject to change)

● Presentation from the Water Quality GIT re: nitrogen removal formula overview

August 10:

● Public meeting/site visit

September 14:


● Begin discussing possible management actions to model

1 Note, this meeting is on a Tuesday to accommodate for a conflict with the presenter’s schedule.

October 12:

● Public meeting/site visit

● Review draft of interim report (due December 1, 2020 -- date subject to change)

November 9:


● Finalize draft of interim report (due December 1, 2020 -- date subject to change)

December 14:


○ Model review and options revision process

Objectives for 2021

● Continue modeling proposed management actions and reviewing results

● Finalize the model and recommended management actions based on the modeling

● Final report due July 1, 2021 (date subject to change)

www.DelmarvaFisheries.org | www.CleanChesapeakeCoalition.org

120 SPEER ROAD, SUITE 1, CHESTERTOWN, MARYLAND 21620

March 9, 2020 Honorable Lawrence J. Hogan, Jr., Governor Honorable Peter V.R. Franchot, Comptroller Honorable Nancy K. Kopp, Treasurer Maryland Board of Public Works State House 100 State Circle Annapolis, Maryland 21401-1925

Re: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2020 Upper Chesapeake Bay Dredge Plan Presents Shell Reclamation Opportunity for Oyster Restoration

Dear Governor Hogan, Comptroller Franchot and Treasurer Kopp: We are writing to bring to your attention a common sense and cost-effective opportunity to reclaim large quantities of natural indigenous oyster shell from northern portions of the Chesapeake Bay for use in all aspects of oyster restoration and propagation - sanctuaries, hatcheries, aquaculture and the wild commercial fishery. Late last month, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Baltimore District, announced that they have begun dredging approximately 5.5 million cubic yards of material from six channels associated with the Baltimore Harbor, ensuring continued safe navigation for vessels calling on the Port of Baltimore. (See attached map and 2/24/20 USACE media release). The “material” being dredged consists primarily of mud, silt, sand, shell, and mixtures thereof. How much shell? If shell accounts for ten percent (10%) of such dredged material, then roughly five (5) million bushels of oyster shells will be removed forever from the Bay by USACE.

That is lunacy while the rhetoric and handwringing over the proposed harvesting of much-needed shell from Man O’War Shoals grinds on. We should all know how much shell could be reclaimed in the process of USACE enhancing access to the Port of Baltimore and the State’s attention and resources should be marshalled accordingly. Absent some intervention by the State of Maryland to reclaim the shell, the dredged material is destined for “beneficial reuse” at Poplar Island and/or placement at containment facilities where the shell only takes up space. In terms of volume, if the shell was removed (screened) from the dredge spoils before placement in containment dikes or upon restoration islands (where it does no good), there would be more room for the dredge materials needing placement in such facilities and oyster industry and restoration stakeholders would celebrate over the availability of shell. The permanent removal of shell from our State waters as a byproduct of USACE channel dredging is an avoidable waste of a valuable natural resource – the scarcity of which causes discord among stakeholders, hinders Maryland’s wild oyster fishery and dooms large scale restoration efforts.

Maryland Board of Public Works – Shell Reclamation via USACE Dredging March 9, 2020 Page 2


In December 2019, Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE), in collaboration with Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) Maryland Port Administration (MPA), issued the Innovative Reuse and Beneficial Use of Dredge Material Guidance Document. Among the Beneficial Uses defined in the Guidance Document for uses of dredged material from the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries placed into waters or bottomland of the Bay or its tidal tributaries is “the creation, restoration, or enhancement of fish or shellfish habitats.” (Environment Article, §5-1102(a)(3)) Appendix A3 of the Guidance Document provides Screening Criteria for Dredged Material. An area on Poplar Island could be suitable for reclaiming oyster shell from dredged material and staging the shell for use in sanctuaries, aquaculture, hatcheries and the wild fishery. Routine sedimentation and accretion in the upper Bay, exacerbated by the loss of trapping capacity in Conowingo Dam reservoir, necessitates the largescale maintenance dredging by USACE for the Port of Baltimore’s viability as well as routine dredging by waterside municipalities and marina owners for their own commerce and viability. It is important to understand and acknowledge that in the northern Bay approximately just 15% of the sediment load is from local shoreline erosion (see Planning for Coastal Resiliency in the Northern Chesapeake Bay1 (February 2019) prepared by EA Engineering for Aberdeen Proving Ground and Harford County). That means that more than 80% of what is being dredged by USACE in the upper Bay to keep the Port of Baltimore viable comes from the Susquehanna River; which begs another question – wouldn’t it be more cost-effective to dredge the accumulated sediment while it is contained in Conowingo reservoir and before being scoured into the Bay during storms in shock loading proportions and dispersed over a much larger area and into shipping channels? Query whether upper Bay channel dredging by USACE has increased as the trapping capacity in Conowingo reservoir has diminished to a state of dynamic equilibrium. We are still urging the Board of Public Works to take affirmative action on the pending DNR permit application to dredge buried oyster shell from precise locations on Man O’War Shoals under certain conditions; which looks like child play compared to the magnitude and crudeness of the channel dredging by USACE now underway, under a blank permit that seems to ignore the spawning season in the upper Bay for numerous aquatic species and other environmental risks. At the same time, in light of USACE’s 2020 upper Bay dredging program, we implore you and the agencies you direct to intercede promptly with USACE to identify the means by which Maryland oyster shell can be efficiently reclaimed in the process – before it is buried in a containment facility or upland on a restoration island where its utility as the absolute best substrate upon which oysters will strike and grow is permanently squandered. The dredging is underway and paid for, so we just need to interject into the process and reclaim our shell.

1 This 2019 report contains information about sedimentation and accretion patterns in the upper Bay, and the potential impacts and use of sediments (including what’s in Conowingo Dam reservoir) in planning for coastal resiliency (i.e., beneficial use). Some noteworthy facts per the report: the average water depth in the 32-square mile area of the upper Bay was reduced by 2.5 feet from the 1840s to 1930s; even more significant, sediment accumulation measured through core sampling indicates that about seven (7) feet of sediment was deposited on the Susquehanna Flats area from the 1890s to 1990s (USGS 2003).

Maryland Board of Public Works – Shell Reclamation via USACE Dredging March 9, 2020 Page 3


Thank you for your attention regarding this timely opportunity to give our collective efforts to realize more oysters in the water an essential ingredient – natural indigenous shell. Please do not delay in exploring this possibility.

Very truly yours,

Ronald H. Fithian Capt. Robert Newberry Chairman, CCC Chairman, DFA Kent County Commissioner

Attachment cc: Jeannie Haddaway-Riccio, Secretary, DNR Ben Grumbles, Secretary, MDE Eastern Shore Delegation Maryland Rural Counties Coalition Oyster Advisory Commission Colonel John T. Litz, District Engineer, USACE

Photo by Christopher Gardner, USACE, Balt imore Distr ict Map shows Brewerton Angle, Brewerton Channel and Brewerton Channel Eastern Extension - three channels associated with Baltimore Harbor that crews under contract with the USACE will be dredging as part of work that began at the end of February 2020. In all, approximately 5.5 million cubic yards of material from six channels, ensuring continued safe navigation for vessels going in and out of the Port of Baltimore. Dredging taking place during spawning season in upper Bay for numerous aquatic species. Compare USACE general dredging permit to conditions per USACE and MDE on proposed Man O’War Shoals shell dredging permit pending before Board of Public Works. Est. 2.785 million cubic yards to be dredged from Maryland channels in upper Bay. Material being removed consists primarily of mud, silt, sand, shell, and mixtures thereof. What percentage of shell? If 10%, then roughly 5 million bushels of oyster shell being removed from the water.

(2/24/20) OVER →

Army Corps begins to remove 5.5 million cubic yards of material from Baltimore Harbor channels U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District; February 24, 2020 BALTIMORE – The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District, has begun dredging approximately 5.5 million cubic yards of material from six channels associated with the Baltimore Harbor, ensuring continued safe navigation for vessels going in and out of the Port of Baltimore. “Baltimore Harbor channels rely on maintenance dredging to serve and strengthen the region and the nation, energize the economy, and reduce navigation safety risks,” said Col. John Litz, Baltimore District commander. “Many diverse commodities import and export from the Port of Baltimore on a daily basis, such as specialized cargo and containers that broke records in 2019.” The amount of material being removed would cover the field at M&T Bank Stadium, goalpost to goalpost, to a height of nearly 2,600 feet, or higher than more than six Baltimore World Trade Centers stacked up. The Corps awarded two contracts worth up to approximately $56.2 million to Great Lakes Dredge and Dock of Oak Brook, Illinois, to conduct maintenance dredging for five Maryland channels and the York Spit Channel in Virginia. Dredging associated with the York Spit Channel contract is tentatively scheduled to begin in May. The following channels used by large container ships traveling to and from Port of Baltimore facilities will be dredged to their respective authorized dimensions, plus allowable over depth of 1 foot: --- Brewerton Angle (Maryland) to a depth of 51 feet and width of 700 feet (roughly 170,000 cubic yards); --- Brewerton Channel (Maryland) to a depth of 51 feet and width of 700 feet (roughly 305,000 cubic yards); --- Brewerton Channel Eastern Extension (Maryland) 36 feet and width of 600 feet (roughly 950,000 cubic yards); --- Tolchester Channel (Maryland) to a depth of 36 feet and width of 600 feet (roughly 1.2 million cubic yards); --- Northwest Branch East Channel (Maryland) to a depth of 50 feet and width of 700 feet (roughly 160,000 cubic yards); --- York Spit Channel (Virginia) to a depth of 51 feet and width of 800 feet (roughly 2.68 million cubic yards). The material being removed consists primarily of mud, silt, sand, shell, and mixtures thereof. In coordination with the State of Maryland, the roughly 2.15 million cubic yards of material dredged from Brewerton Channel Eastern Extension and Tolchester Channel will be beneficially reused at the Paul S. Sarbanes Ecosystem Restoration Project at Poplar Island located on the eastern side of the Chesapeake Bay. Also in coordination with the State of Maryland, the roughly 635,000 cubic yards of material dredged from Brewerton Angle, Brewerton Channel and Northwest Branch East Channel will be placed at the Masonville Dredge Material Containment Facility. In coordination with the State of Maryland and the Commonwealth of Virginia, the roughly 2.68 million cubic yards of material dredged from the York Spit Channel will be placed in the Wolf Trap Alternate Placement Site, Northern Extension. Maintenance dredging of the Maryland channels is expected to conclude by early summer.

Group Exercise Results from Jan. 6, 2020 OAC Meeting

Team Members: Leggett, Brown, Sowers, Hershey, Mautz Team Response to Question 1 (three easiest issues):

1. Hatchery capacity / Address idle Sanctuaries 2. Empower DNR to undertake more pilot programs / adaptive management efforts

throughout bar tributaries;

3. More shell and substrate 4. Funding for restoration (fishery and ecosystem)

Team Response to Question 2 (three hardest issues): 1. Water quality impairments (stormwater runoff, Conowingo Dam, SAV loss, continued

development)

2. Regulation of fishery 3. Disease and adaptive management if an outbreak occurs

4. Sanctuary – Better ways to monitor, determine performance and evaluate success. Team Members: Colden, Witt, Wilkens, Ruth, Harrison, Swanson

Team Response to Question 1 (three easiest issues): 1. Collaborative effort to raise money for fishery (reduce latent effort) through increased

and mandatory surcharge and establish of new fund on bushels caught. 2. Overall comprehensive spatiality-explicit substrate planting plan with shell budget. 3. New bay bottom survey.

Team Response to Question 2 (three hardest issues): 1. Agree to a given set of facts and scientific information on what to base decisions on.

2. How to apply stock assessment to management. Team Members: Gray, Dean, Pluta, Fowler, Miller, Kilinski, Hite

Team Response to Question 1 (three easiest issues): 1. Substrate is limiting recruitment.

2. Need more and better data for better management. 3. Reevaluating inactive sanctuaries. (e.g. Chester River)

Team Response to Question 2 (three hardest issues):

1. Boundaries and timeline of restored sanctuaries. 2. Man-O-War Shoals dredging

3. Balance of harvest and ecological role of oysters Team Members: Knoche, Lewis, Lingerman, Lowe, Mullin

Team Response to Question 1 (three easiest issues): 1. Availability of process to get topics on the agenda, in a timely manner

2. Action item for up or down vote. IFA 3. New topic or issue is brought up, to be put on the next meeting’s agenda.

Team Response to Question 2 (three hardest issues):

1. Designate seeds areas for use in the Fishers, Aquaculture, and Sanctuaries. 2. Identify areas for shell.

3. Reconcile science with local knowledge.

scoping gear line change for patent tonging: patuxent river … … · working meeting with dr....

Documents