EPA/600/R-96/052
                                              May 1996
              Proceedings
      Delmarva's Coastal Bay
             Watersheds:
       Not Yet Up The Creek

     A Conference on Ecology
             and  Economy
                    Edited by
Kimberly Beidler,* Patricia Gant,** Marsha Ramsay* and Gwynne Schultz*
                 *JACA Corporation
                Fort Washington, PA
           **U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                Annapolis, MD 21401
               *Assateague Coastal Trust
                 Berlin, MD 21811
         **Maryland Department of Natural Resources
                Annapolis, MD 21401
                  March 8-9, 1996
                  Ocean City, MD

        United States Environmental Protection Agency
         National Health and Environmental Effects
                Research Laboratory
               Atlantic Ecology Division
                 27 Tarzwell Drive
               Narrangansett, Rl 02882
                                        Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
                                      ABSTRACT
   On March 8-9 1996, 269 people attended the Delmarva Coastal Bay Watersheds Conference in
Ocean City, Maryland. The purpose of the conference was to provide a forum for citizens, elected
and appointed officials and other decisionmakers, and special interest representatives to discuss the
economic and environmental state of the Delmarva coastal watersheds and to determine further
continuing actions and activities. The design of the conference provided a unique opportunity for
citizens in the Delmarva region to express their ideas and to apply their collective wisdom to begin
to formulate strategies that will integrate economic, environmental, scientific and social considerations
toward achieving a sustainable future.

   The conference goals were:

   1.  To promote the concept of balancing economic well being and environmental protection and
       demonstrate why we should care about the coastal bays and their watersheds.

   2.  To encourage and secure stakeholder involvement.

   3.  To hear about and share local perspectives on the coastal bays and their watersheds.

   4.  To impart scientific information about the coastal bays and their watersheds.

   5.  To inform participants about the National Estuary Program and other models as vehicles for
       problem solving.

   6.  To help launch Maryland's National  Estuary Program (NEP).

   7.  To help Delaware's Center for the Inland Bays increase public involvement.

   8.  To transfer lessons  and encourage  Virginia's participation in a  Delmarva  coastal bays
       coalition.

   9.  To  use  a  conference  report/summary to  help  communicate  stakeholder   views to
        decisionmakers.

   10. To establish  next steps: Where do we go from here?

   It was understood that these goals were very  ambitious  and that this  conference would open the
door to future conferences, meetings and workshops — locally, Delmarva-wide and state-by-state.
Future activities are now being determined in large part by  citizen  input to a pre-conference
questionnaire (see page 28), by the 83 (31 percent)  evaluation  forms  that were turned in at the
conference (see Appendix B), and the questions  raised during the conference (see Appendix C).
Page ii
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
                                      PREFACE
The appropriate citation for this report is:

Beidler, K., P. Gant, M. Ramsay, and G. Schultz,  1996.  Proceedings - Delmarva's Coastal Bay
   Watersheds: Not Yet Up the Creek. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Health and
   Environmental Effects  Research Laboratory,  Atlantic Ecology Division, Narrangansett, RI.
   EPA/600/R-95/052.

This report is AED Contribution Number 1787.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
Page iii

-------
                            ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
AGENDA PLANNING COMMITTEE

Dr. Warren Flint, The Eastern Shore Institute

Rick Johnstone, Delmarva Power

Dr. Frederick Kutz, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Dr. Kent Price, Delaware Center for the Inland Bays

Marsha Ramsay, Assateague Coastal Trust

Gwynne Schultz, Maryland Department of Natural Resources


CONFERENCE DONORS

 D6Illi3lV3   Delmarva Power and Light
               Maryland Department of Natural Resources
               (through grants from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
               and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)
               This conference and proceedings were funded in part by the Coastal Zone
               Management Program of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources pursuant
               to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Award No. NA470Z0132.
               The views expressed here are those of the presenters and do not necessarily reflect
               those of the sponsoring agencies.
Northampton County, VA

South Moon Under
 Page iv
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
 INLAND   Delaware Center for the Inland Bays
PROCEEDINGS DONORS
               U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
            2  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
               Maryland Department of Natural Resources
               National Park Service
               Ocean City, MD
              Worcester County, MD
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
Pagev

-------
                                 CONTENTS

ABSTRACT	- ii

PREFACE	iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS		  iv

AGENDA	1

MAP OF DELMARVA PENINSULA		5

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

      Call to Order and Introductions, Marsha Ramsay, President,
      Assateague Coastal Trust	6

      Welcome, James Barrett, President, Board of Worcester
      County Commissioners	•	8

      Opening Remarks and Introduction of Keynote Speaker,
      W. Michael McCabe, Regional Administrator, EPA Region III	  9

PRESENTATIONS

      A Framework for Theory and Practice in Landscape
      Planning:  Alternative Futures for Monroe County,
      Dr. Carl Steinitz,  Alexander and Victoria Wiley
      Professor of Landscape Architecture and Planning,
      Harvard Graduate School of Design (Presented by
      Madis Pihlak, Department of Horticulture and
      Landscape Architecture, University of Maryland)	11

      Panel Discussion:  Changing Conditions in the
      Delmarva Coastal Bay Watersheds:  Linking People,
      Economics, and Environment

             Sussex County, DE, Robert Stickels, Sussex
             County Administrator, Sussex County, DE	  14

             Worcester County, MD, Phil Hager,
             Worcester County Planning Department	20
 Page vi
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
             Accomack-Northampton Planning District
             Commission, James McGowan, Planner	.  . . .	25

       Report on Pre-Conference Questionnaire on Public
       Perceptions, James M. Falk, University of Delaware,
       Sea Grant Marine Advisory Service	28

       Sustainable Development:  A Framework for a
       New Century, Peggy Duxbury, President's
       Council on Sustainable Development		32

       Report on Breakout Groups to Develop a
       Common Vision for Achieving Both Healthy
       Economy and Environment, Focusing on
       Specific Coastal Issues  	.	36

       State of Maryland Remarks, Verna Harrison, Assistant
       Secretary,  Maryland Department of Natural Resources	45

       Panel Discussion:  What is the Environmental and Economic
       Status of the Coastal Bays and Their Watersheds?

             Environmental Health of the  Delmarva Coastal
             Bays and Their Watersheds, Dr. Frederick Kutz,
             ORD Regional Scientist, EPA Region III	46

             Economic Status of Fisheries and Aquaculture,
             John Dunnigan, Executive Director, Atlantic
             States Marine Fisheries Commission	53

             Delmarva's Tourism Industry, Lisa Challenger,
             Worcester Tourism	56

             Agriculture and Forestry, John Tarburton,
             Secretary, Delaware Department of Agriculture	 58

             Question and Answer Session	60

       Panel Discussion:  Models for Addressing Coastal Bays
       Issues:  Where do We Go from Here?

             Regional Perspectives on Coastal Bays
             Issues, W.  Michael McCabe, Regional Administrator,
             EPA Region III  .	63
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
Page vii

-------
             National Estuary Program in Maryland,
             Gwynne Schultz,  Director, Coastal Zone Management
             Division, Maryland Department of Natural Resources 	65

             Delaware Center for the Inland Bays,
             Dr. Bruce Richards, Executive Director,
             and Dr. Kent Price,  Chair	67

             Virginia's Approach to Sustainability:  Balancing
             Environment and Economy, Dr. Warren Flint, Executive
             Director, The Eastern Shore Institute	70

       Report on Breakout Groups to Discuss Models and Their
       Applications to State and Local Strategies	 76

       Full Conference Discussion on Issues and Strategies
       Best Addressed by a Delmarva-Wide Approach	81
                            ,<
       Conference Follow Up,  W. Michael McCabe,  Regional Administrator,
       EPA Region III	83

APPENDIX A - Delmarva Coastal Bays Conference Participants	85

APPENDIX B - Conference Evaluation Form	98

APPENDIX C - Remaining Questions	  100
Page viii
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
                                    AGENDA

                     Delmarva's Coastal Bay Watersheds:
                            Not Yet "Up The Creek"

                     A  Conference on Ecology and Economy

                                 March 8-9,  1996
                                 Carousel Hotel
                                 Ocean City, MD
Friday, March 8th

12:30  Registration

12:55  Call to Order and Introductions: Marsha Ramsay, President, Assateague Coastal Trust

1:00   Welcome:  Roland "Fish" Powell, Mayor, Ocean City and James Barrett, President, Board
       of Worcester County Commissioners

1:05   Remarks and Introduction of Keynote  Speaker: W. Michael McCabe, EPA  Regional
       Administrator

1:10   A  Frameworkfor Landscape Planning: Alternative Futures for Monroe County, PA:T)r. Carl
       Steinitz, Alexander and Victoria Wiley Professor of Landscape Architecture
       and Planning, Harvard Graduate School of Design

2:00   PANEL DISCUSSION: CHANGING CONDITIONS IN THE DELMARVA COASTAL BAY
       WATERSHEDS: LINKING PEOPLE, ECONOMICS AND ENVIRONMENT

       Facilitator: Dr. Kent Price, Chair, Center for the Inland Bays

       Worcester County, MD: Phil Hager, Worcester County Planning Department

       Sussex County, DE: Robert Stickels, Sussex County Administrator

       Accomack-Northampton Planning District Commission: James McGowan, Planner

2:45   Discussion Facilitator: Dr. Kent Price
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
Pagel

-------
3:00  WHAT DO STAKEHOLDERS PERCEIVE AS THE MOST CHALLENGING
      ECONOMIC/ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES?

      Facilitator: Marsha Ramsay, Assateague Coastal Trust

      • Report on Pre-Conference Questionnaire on Public Perceptions:  James  M.  Falk,
        University of Delaware, Sea Grant Marine Advisory Service

      • Breakout Groups to Develop a Common Vision for Achieving Both Healthy Economy and
        Environment, Focusing on Specific Coastal Issues:

        1. Tourism and Recreation
        2. Residential  Growth and Development
        3. Fisheries, Shellfisheries, Aquaculture
        4. Agriculture: Poultry, Crops and Forestry
         Facilitators and Recorders:

         Dr. David Goshorn
         Kathleen Ellett
         Carl Zimmerman
         Ilia Feher
         Jeanne Lynch
         Grace Pierce-Beck
Eric Walbeck
Stacey Marek
Abigail Lambert
Vivian Newman
Pat Campbell-White
Phil Hager
5:30   BUFFET DINNER

6:15   SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: A BALANCING ACT

       Introduction of Guest Speaker: Dr. Warren Flint, Executive Director, The Eastern Shore
       Institute

       Sustainable Development: A Framework for a New Century Molly Harriss Olson, Executive
       Director, President's Council on Sustainable Development

       Discussion Facilitator: Dr. Warren Flint

7:00   REPORTS FROM BREAKOUT GROUPS

       Facilitator: Marsha Ramsay

8:00   SOCIAL HOUR AND EXHIBITS
 Page 2
                                       DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
 Saturday, March 9th

 8:30   Coffee/Refreshments

 8:45   RECAP OF FRIDAY:  Geraldine Bachman, Executive  Director, Lower Eastern Shore
       Heritage Committee

 9:00   WHAT IS THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC  STATUS OF THE COASTAL
       BAYS AND THEIR WATERSHEDS?

       Facilitator: Gwynne Schultz, Director, Coastal Zone Management Division, MD Department
       of Natural Resources

       Environmental Health of the Delmarva Coastal Bays and Their Watersheds- Dr. Frederick
       Kutz, EPA Region III

       Resource Experts: Dr. Rob Magnien, MD DNR; Dr. Kent Price, U DE; John Masted,
       DNREC; Barry Truitt, The Nature Conservancy; Dr. Rich Eskin, MDE

       Economic Status of Fisheries and Aquaculture: John Dunnigan, Executive Director, Atlantic
       States Marine Fisheries Commission

       Resource Experts: Michael Pierson,  Cherrystone Aquafarms; Bruce McGuigan, Captain
       Mack's Bait and Tackle;  Tom Smith, commercial fisherman; Jim Casey, MD
       DNR; Steve Beaston, Beaston Marina; Mark Homer, MD DNR

       Delmarva's Tourism Industry: Lisa Challenger, Worcester  Tourism

       Resource Experts: Jim Falk, U DE; John Schroer, Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge;
       Mark Koenings, Assateague Island National Seashore

       Agriculture and Forestry: John Tarburton, Secretary, DE Department of Agriculture

       Resource Experts: Bill Satterfield, DPI; W. Simpson Dunahoo, poultry farmer; Sam Dyke,
       Glatfelter Pulpwood;  Chris Lewis, Lower Shore Land Trust

9:55   Break to Develop Questions

10:10  Discussion Facilitator: Gwynne Schultz

11:00  MODELS FOR ADDRESSING COASTAL BAYS ISSUES: WHERE DO WE GO FROM
       HERE?

       Facilitator: Rick Johnstone, Delmarva Power

       Regional Perspectives on Coastal Bays Issues: W. Michael McCabe, Administrator, EPA
       Region III
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
Page 3

-------
      National Estuary  Program in Maryland:  Gwynne Schultz, Director,  Coastal Zone
      Management Division, Maryland Department of Natural Resources

      Delaware Center for the Inland Bays: Dr. Bruce Richards, Executive Director, and Dr. Kent
      Price, Chair

      Virginia's Regional Approach to Sustainability: Balancing Environment and Economy: Dr.
      Warren Flint, Executive Director, The Eastern Shore Institute

12:15  BREAKOUT GROUPS TO DISCUSS MODELS AND THEIR APPLICATIONS TO STATE
      AND LOCAL STRATEGIES:

      (AFTER PICKING UP BOX LUNCHES)

      Maryland: Facilitator:  Gwynne Schultz

      Delaware: Facilitator:  Dr. Bruce Richards

      Virginia: Facilitator: Dr. Warren Flint

1:20   FULL CONFERENCE RECONVENES TO IDENTIFY ISSUES AND STRATEGIES BEST
      ADDRESSED BY A DELMARVA-WIDE APPROACH

      Facilitator:  Rick Johnstone

2:15   CONFERENCE FOLLOW UP: Michael McCabe
      PRESS CONFERENCE

      All officials are invited to participate with conference planning subcommittee.
 Page 4
                                     DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
                  MAJOR WATERSHEDS AND BAYS  OF THE
             DELMARVA PENINSULA'S ATLANTIC COASTLINE
                                                                            Delaware Inland
                                                                            Bays Watershed
                                                                            Maryland Coastal
                                                                            Bays Watershed


                                                                            Virginia Eastern Shore
                                                                            Atlantic Watershed
                                                    Delaware
                                                    Inland Bays
                                                Maryland
                                                Coastal Bays
       Accomack Co.
                         Virginia Eastern Shore
                         Coastal Bays Complex
                    Northampton Co.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                                                               PageS

-------
                  CALL TO ORDER AND INTRODUCTIONS

                                   Marsha Ramsay
                       President, Assateague Coastal Trust
   On behalf  of the  30  sponsors  of this
conference,  welcome.    I  hope  everyone  is
wearing a name  tag so  that we can become
familiar with one another — and it's our meal
ticket.

   Please take a moment to look in your packets
to find the list of attendees.  Those people with
asterisks next  to their  names  represent  our
sponsors.

   I would like to introduce the members of the
agenda planning committee —those with double
asterisks — with whom since August I have
been in  constant communication to  put this
conference together:

   • Dr. Warren  Flint, an ecology and coastal
     ecosystem scientist and Executive Director
     of the Eastern Shore Institute.
   • Dr. Rick  Kutz, a  scientist from  EPA's
     Office   of  Research   and  Development
     assigned  to  the  Region  III  office   in
     Annapolis.
   • Rick Johnstone, Supervisor of Forestry for
     Delmarva  Power  and  Light  Company,
      serves  on many state  boards  and public
      interest groups, and chairs MD's Wicomico
      Forestry Board.
   •  Dr. Kent Price is Associate Professor in the
      Graduate  College  of Marine Studies and
      Director of the Sea Grant Advisory Service
      at the  University of Delaware.  He chairs
      the Delaware Center for the Inland Bays
    and  its  Science  and Technical Advisory
    Committee.
  • Gwynne Schultz  is Director of the Coastal
    Zone Management Division at the Maryland
    Department  of Natural Resources, and is
    responsible for the start up of Maryland's
    National Estuary Program.

  I also want to  thank two Assateague Coastal
Trust  members:  Eric Walbeck, who handled
conference registration and logistics, and Terry
Thompson, who coordinated the exhibits. Let's
also thank  Nancy Howard for  coordinating
publicity.    Nancy  is  with   the  Maryland
Department  of Natural Resources.  And also,
Kathy Ellett and Dave Goshorn, both with the
MD DNR.

  In your packets is a list of conference donors
to whom we  extend our  heartfelt thanks.  I
would also  like  to call your  attention  to the
evaluation form  in your packets.  Please fill
them  out and put them on the registration desk
before you leave tomorrow. We really want to
know how you feel  about this  conference and
where you want  to go from here.

   This conference  is  a stakeholders' conference.
A stakeholder is anyone and everyone who has
an interest  in, or cares about, the  Delmarva
Coastal Bays Watershed area.   The purpose of
this conference  is to provide  a forum  for all
stakeholders —  citizens, elected and appointed
officials,  and  public  and   special  interest
representatives — to discuss the economic and
 Page 6
                                          DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
 environmental state of the Delmarva Coastal Bay
 Watersheds, and to begin to formulate strategies
 that will  integrate economic,  environmental,
 scientific  and  social   considerations  toward
 achieving  a sustainable future.

   This  is  a  stakeholders'  conference  —
 undoubtedly, one of many to come as we work
 to ensure both a robust economy and a healthy
 environment.

   The meeting will begin with a few words of
 welcome from our host community.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
Page?

-------
                                     WELCOME

                                    James Barrett
                   Worcester County Board of Commissioners
  Good afternoon. Welcome to Ocean City and
welcome to Worcester County.   Mayor Fish
Powell couldn't make it here today, but I would
also like to welcome you here from him.

  Years ago, I used to fish a lot.  There were a
lot  of fish in the bay. This conference today is
well overdue.  As President of the Worcester
County Board  of Commissioners, I  want to
challenge  each  and every one of you to work
together as a team  to help our  inland bays.
When  I say "work together as a team", I am
talking about many different groups of people:
builders, government officials of all the counties,
town officials, boaters, land owners, DNR state
officials,  developers, EPA  and other federal
agencies,    environmentalists,   farmers,   and
citizens. This should be a partnership of how to
clean up the bay. Those fish that I caught years
ago are just not there because the plant life  is
dead in the bay.
  So we need this partnership very much. It's
hard work; you can talk to a lot of people and
they can tell you all of the problems, but they do
not have the solutions.  What we need to do is
not talk about the problems, but get to work and
get them fixed. The  greatest thing that we can
leave to our children  is the natural resources in
this land that we have. The next generation and
our generation can do that.  And you people can
help do that.

  Thank you very much and welcome to Ocean
City.
 PageS
                                          DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
                                OPENING REMARKS

                                  W. Michael McCabe
                   Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region III
   W. Michael McCabe served as a top aide to
Senator Joe Biden and as Staff Director of the
House  Energy  Conservation   and  Power
Subcommittee    and   the  Congressional
Environmental and Energy Study Conference.
Mike is currently the EPA Region III Regional
Administrator   and   is   responsible   for
implementing   environmental   protection
programs in PA, DE,  MD,  VA,  WV, and DC.
He is originally from Delaware.

   Welcome on behalf of EPA Region III.
Entire areas of the coastal bays fall within our
area of responsibility  and we are delighted
with the amount of interest shown in the future
of the coastal bays as evidenced by the  large
attendance here today. Your attendance at this
conference  demonstrates that the  American
people are interested in moving forward with
the environmental progress made over the last
25 years.

   The coastal bays of Delaware, Maryland and
Virginia  are  an  important  ecological  and
economic   resource   whose   physical
characteristics   and   location  make   them
particularly  vulnerable to   the  effects  of
pollutants.   These estuarine bays are affected
by pollutants that come from  the land as well
as  stresses  that  come  from  the   ocean.
Atmospheric deposition of pollutants represents
another source of stress. About 90 percent of
commercial  fish, crabs and shellfish depend in
some way on  estuaries and associated salt
marshes for  their livelihood.
  This is an important conference for us here
in Region III for several reasons:

  • First, this conference is a prime example
    of our ability to use scientific information
    to guide and evaluate our environmental
    decision-making.    The  motivation  for
    holding this conference is largely based
    on a cooperative Federal and State study
    which you will hear more about later in
    the conference.  Having environmental
    information  upon   which   to  guide
    management   decisions  is  a  major
    objective of my tenure as the Regional
    Administrator.

  • Secondly,  this conference also represents
    our  initiative   to  involve   community
    stakeholders in our resource management.
    Considering both the socio-economic and
    environmental  issues  in our  decision-
    making  is  an  absolute necessity as  we
    move   into   the   next   century   of
    environmental protection.

  • Thirdly, this endeavor provides us with a
    timely   illustration  of  the  need   for
    Regional involvement. The areas of these
    coastal bays crosses the boundaries  of
    three States.  Our  efforts to effectively
    manage  these  bays  require  the  full
    participation   of   all   three   States
    coordinated by a Regional presence.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                   Page 9

-------
  I am here  for the  entire conference;  my
primary role will be as a listener and learner.
I am  not  here  today  to announce  new
regulations  or  enforcement  actions.     I
encourage this group over the  next 24 hours
with beginning to  find  new and innovative
ways of addressing these issues  that will be
reasonable to  all stakeholders.  The diversity
of this audience will provide many different
perspectives.  These perspectives will need to
be considered as we move  ahead to face the
variety of issues associated with our protection
of both these resources and our way of life.
 Page 10
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
    A FRAMEWORK FOR THEORY AND PRACTICE IN LANDSCAPE
     PLANNING:  ALTERNATIVE FUTURES FOR MONROE COUNTY

                                Carl Steinitz, Author
                      Department of Landscape Architecture
                 Harvard University Graduate School of Design
                                   Cambridge, MA

                              Madis Pihlak, Presenter
             Department of Horticulture & Landscape Architecture
                              University of Maryland
                                 College Park, MD
   Due to inclement weather, Dr. Carl Steinitz,
 was unable to attend the conference.  In his
place, Madis Pihlak, ASIA, AICP, delivered the
presentation.  Mr.  Pihlak  is an Associate
Professor and Program  Coordinator  in  the
Department of Horticulture  and  Landscape
Architecture at the  University of Maryland.  He
has   been  involved  in   -workshops   -with
stakeholders and has researched the impacts of
actions  and inactions on communities -which
have similar environmental problems.

   In 1990, after almost  25  years of applying
GIS to many projects, I came to the realization
that there was a common structure to this work,
and I wrote a short paper entitled "A Framework
for Theory (Steinitz 1990).  Over the past three
years, this framework has become the primary
organizational basis of my teaching, research and
projects.   In this  talk,  I will  give  a brief
description of this framework and show how it
was applied to a recent project.

Six Questions in Search of An Answer
   My proposed framework identifies six types of
questions.  Each can be considered a level of
inquiry relating to a theory-driven modeling type.
The models on which we rely must be based in
usable and presumed-to-be-valid theory.  They
each require the management of information, and
GIS can be applied—albeit differently—in each
type of model.

   Project managers and researchers will work
through  the framework  at least three times  in
any project:  first, in defining the context and
scope of the  project; second (and  in reverse
order) in specifying the project methodology;
and third, in carrying the project forward to its
conclusion.    The  six  questions  with  their
associated modeling types are listed in the usual
order  for initially defining the context of a
landscape planning study.

I. How should the state of the landscape be
  described: in content,  boundaries, space, and
  time?
  This level of inquiry leads to representation
models.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                   Page 11

-------
II.  How does the landscape operate?   What
    are   the   functional   and   structural
    relationships among its elements?
  This level of inquiry leads to process models.

HI. Is the current landscape functioning -well?

  The metrics of judgment (whether of health,
beauty,  cost, nutrient flow or user satisfaction)
lead to evaluation models.

IV. How might  the landscape be altered:  by
    what actions, where, and when?
  This  is  directly related  to  I, above, in that
both are data; vocabulary and syntax.

  This  4th level of  inquiry  leads  to change
models.  At least two important types of change
should be considered:  changes brought about by
current  trends   and   changes  caused  by
implementable   actions,   such    as   plans,
investments, and regulations.

V.   What  predictable differences  might  the
     changes cause?
   This  5th level of inquiry  shapes  impact
models,  in which the  process models (II) ) are
used to simulate change. This is directly related
to  II,  above,  in  that  both  are   based on
information; on predictive theory

VI. Should the landscape be changed? How is
     a comparative evaluation of the impacts of
     alternative changes to be made?
   This is  directly related  to III, above, in that
both are based on knowledge; on cultural values.

   This sixth level of inquiry leads to decision
models.

   Implementation could be considered another
 level, but this framework treats it as a forward-
 in-time  feedback to level I,  the  creation of a
 changed representation model.

   Although the six levels have been presented in
 the order in which they are normally recognized,
    I believe that it is more helpful to consider them
    in reverse order, both as a more effective way of
    organizing  a  landscape-planning   study  and
    specifying its method, which I consider the key
    strategic  phase,  and  as  a  more  effective
    educational  approach.   The methods  of  a
    landscape planning  study should be organized
    and specified  upwards  through  the levels  of
    inquiry, with each level defining its necessary
    contributing products from  the models  next
    above in the framework.  This is how it works
    in practice:

    VI  To be  able  to decide to propose  or  to
         propose or to make a change, one needs to
         know how to compare the alternatives.
    V   To be able to compare alternatives, one
         needs to predict their impacts from having
         simulated changes.
    IV  To be able to simulate change, one needs to
         specify  (or  design)  the changes to  be
         simulated.
    Ill  To be able to specify potential  changes (if
         any),  one needs to evaluate  the current
         conditions.
    II To  be able  to evaluate  the landscape, one
       needs to understand how it works.
     I To   understand  how it  works,  one  needs
       representational schema to  describe it.   (This
       has been the major GIS role.)

       Then, in order to be effective and efficient, a
     landscape  planning  project  should  progress
     downward at least  once through each level of
     inquiry, apply ing the appropriate modeling types:
     representation, process,  evaluation,  change,
     impact and  decision.  At the extreme,  two
     decisions present themselves: no and yes.  A no
     implies a backward feedback loop and the need
     to alter a prior level.  All six levels can be the
     focus  of feedback; "redesign"  and sensitivity
     analysis  are  frequently   applied   feedback
     strategies at Level IV.

        A contingent yes decision (still a no) may also
     trigger a shift in the scale or size or time of the
     study.  (An example  is the decision to locate a
 Page 12
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
 highway corridor made on the basis of a more
 detailed alignment analysis). In a scale shift, the
 study will again proceed through the six levels
 of the framework as described above.

   A project should normally continue until  it
 achieves a positive, yes, decision.  (In my area
 of application, a do not build conclusion can be
 a positive decision).   A yes decision implies
 implementation and (one assumes) a forward-in-
 time change to new representation models.

   While the  framework  looks  orderly  and
 sequential, the line through any project is not  a
 smooth  path:   it has  false starts, dead  ends,
 serendipitous discoveries—but the line has to
 pass through the  questions and models of the
 framework as I have described it before a yes
 can  be achieved.

   The framework has  been the  basis for the
 organization  of several regional studies and is
 applied in this talk to a study of the future of
 Monroe  County.

 References

   Steinitz,   C.  "A  Framework  for  Theory
 Applicable  to  the  Education  of  Landscape
 Architects  (and  Other  Environmental  Design
 Professionals)," Landscape  Journal,  October
 1990.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
Page 13

-------
                               SUSSEX COUNTY, DE

                                   Robert L. Stickels
                            Sussex County Administrator
  Robert  Stickels  is  the  Sussex  County
Administrator.    Mr.  Stickels has  a  strong
background  in   business  and  government
management.  He has  been the Town Manager
of  Georgetown,   DE,  and  Deputy  County
Administrator for Sussex County from 1988 to
the present. He has also been a member of the
Delmarva  Advisory  Council, the  Executive
Council  of the Delaware  Inland Bays Estuary
Program,  the   Delaware  Private  Industry
Council, as well as other organizations.

   Sussex County's portion of the  Delmarva
Coastal Bays has  changed dramatically since the
1950's.  Geographically, Sussex County is one
of the largest counties east of the Mississippi.
This has resulted in a  diversified economy.  In
the 1950's and  1960's, the County's  primary
industry was agriculture.   In the 1970's, the
economy  started to  diversify with  tourism
becoming  the  second largest industry in the
County. The total County population in  1950
was 61,360; in 1990 it was 113,226.  The entire
population impact cannot be measured totally on
census figures.   Census figures do not include
summer  and  part-time  population.    It  is
estimated  that 5.4 Million  people  visit our
County's beaches  annually.   This has been a
dramatic change from the 1950's and  1960's,
when most of the beach resorts closed at Labor
Day.  Sussex County beaches are located within
a four hour drive of one-third of the population
of the United States.
       To get a true figure on how much  Sussex
     County has grown,  you can also look at the
     assessment base of the County.  This gives an
     indication   of  the   number   of  year-round
     residential   homes,   seasonal  homes,   and
     commercial building that has taken place in the
     Inland Bays Watershed.  Property assessment for
     the Inland Bays Watershed area was $70,114,444
     in  1960;  in  1990  the assessment  grew  to
     $892,322,377  for the same area.   This is  an
     increase of 1,172% in four decades.  As we look
     ahead  to  the  year 2020, populations  are
     estimated to increase an additional  31.59% for
     our County.

       Unfortunately, rules and regulations protecting
     the environment and the welfare of the residents
     and visitors of Sussex County did not develop as
     quickly as   our population  and  buildings
     increased.  Public acceptance of regulations has
     been very  slow.   In  the  1960's,  it was the
     attitude that  if you owned the property,  you
     could do what you want with it. The 1970's led
     to development  of zoning   ordinances  and
     regulations. A major breakthrough in the 1970's
     was the adoption of the Coastal Zone Act.  It
     has been stated that former Governor Russell W.
     Peterson, who was the author of this legislation,
     led a major breakthrough that pointed the way
     for other states and the federal government to
     preserve priceless coastline resources.  In the
     1980's, the Sussex County Council realized that
     density should be reduced as well as the heights
     of buildings if Sussex County coastlines were to
     avoid duplicating Ocean City, Maryland.
 Page 14
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
   Over the decades, we have learned that it is
 not enough just to have zoning ordinances if we
 are going to  protect the environment and the
 quality of life that has been expected in Sussex
 County.   The infrastructure must be  in place.
 This infrastructure should provide protection for
 water quality.  With the completion of the West
 Rehoboth Sewer District,  a $70 Million project,
 all homes located along the Atlantic Ocean have
 the capability of  being  connected to  central
 wastewater.   This is a  vast improvement from
 the 1960's, when on holiday weekends, residents
 actually had wastewater flowing in the  streets.
 The County's South Coastal  Area  Planning
 Study  lays out new sewer districts in the Inland
 Bays   area.    Over  5,000  users  have been
 connected already to Inland Bays central sewer
 systems.  The County has plans to spend over
 $25 million over the next five years to connect
 more homes.

   Creation of central water and sewer districts is
 not the entire answer for the protection of the
 Coastal Bays.  Reduction  in density and  greater
 setbacks  from  wetlands   are  also  important.
 However,  public  acceptance   of  additional
 regulations is  not always easily obtained. It has
 been my experience that a majority of the people
 living in the Coastal Bays area are only here for
 a short period of time. Many people only live in
 the area for a three to seven year period.  People
 who purchase summer homes may only wish to
 visit the area for a three to  five year  period
 before their recreational interests change to other
 areas.  Retirees who move to the area are usually
 on a fixed income and wish to take advantage of
 Sussex County's low tax base.  Many of these
people are unable  to pay what is  needed to
protect the bays.  The difficulty lies in trying to
 come up with long-term cost effective solutions.

   I hope I do not sound like a doomsayer. I do
 believe we are going  in  the  right direction.
 Sussex Countians are willing to do their share to
protect  Delmarva  Coastal Bays.    There  is
 evidence that water quality is already improving.
If  we  are   going  to  continue  to  make
 improvements, we are going to need consistency
in federal, state and local regulations.  Federal
and   state   agencies   cannot   expect  local
governments to be more restrictive than their
own requirements.  If the state feels that there
should  be property line setbacks  from state
wetlands, local ordinances should be supported
with state law.  Local governments cannot be
expected  to  develop  ordinances that restrict
building  in  federal  wetlands if  the federal
government will still issue permits to allow for
construction.     Consistency  in   rules  and
regulations   between   the   three   levels  of
government is necessary. Once this consistency
is developed, we will have  to  obtain public
acceptance, political fortitude and administrative
wisdom if we wish to see  the Delmarva area
continue to be  a desirable place to  live  and
vacation.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                     Page 15

-------
     SUSSEX COUNTY,
           ASSESSMENT
          Millions
   $1,000
    $800
    $600
    $400
    $200
      $0
           1960
1970
1980
1990
                                ASSESSMENTS
                              Series 1
Page 16
    DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
       O
       o

       X
       LLJ
       CO
       CO
       ID
       CO
                    o
                    CM
                    CM
                     i

                    O
                    «c
                    C5
spuesnoqj.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                          Page 17

-------
Page 18
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------

          I

       D
       CL
       1-
       O
       Q
       X
       LLJ
       CO
       CO
       CO
CD
CM
O
CM
 i

O
                                        spuesnoiji
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                            Page 19

-------
                            WORCESTER COUNTY, MD

                                        Phil Hager
                      Worcester County Planning Department
   Phil Hager is a graduate of Frostburg State
 University  and  holds a  Master's  degree in
 Intergovernmental Policy Analysis  from  The
 George   Washington  University  School  of
 Government and Business Administration.  Mr.
 Hager previously worked for  the Maryland
 General Assembly and on Capitol Hill for the
 United States Senate.  For the past 7 years, he
 has been actively involved in land use planning
 and demography.  In  that capacity, he has
 worked for the Maryland National Capitol Park
 and Planning Commission, and as a consultant
for  the   telecommunications industry.    Since
 August  1995,   he has  been employed  as a
 Planner for Worcester County Maryland.

   The following is  a  descriptive  analysis of
 Worcester County, Maryland.  In a moment, I will
 be delivering a brief historical overview, a series
 of facts and figures detailing Worcester's present
 conditions,  and a cursory analysis for our  future.
 Some  of these demographic data are contained in
 the  tables  on  the blue sheets that have  been
 distributed,  or  are  in  the  process of  being
 distributed.

   In addition to  increasing our overall awareness
 relative to local demographic conditions, it is also
 my desire to go a little bit beyond the statistics and
 attempt to offer interpretive analysis. In short, we
 will look at what has been happening, what is
 currently happening, what we expect to happen, as
 well as why.  This may be helpful to us  as we
 collectively strive to address the issues before this
 conference.
       Worcester County  is Maryland's eastern-most
     jurisdiction.  Additionally, it is the only Maryland
     subdivision bordering the Atlantic Ocean. Nearly
     20 percent of the County experiences some form
     of tidal influence.  A ridge extending the length of
     the County running roughly northeast to southwest
     divides the two major watersheds. The land areas
     on the  west side of this  feature flow  to  the
     Pocomoke and eventually to the Bay. Areas to the
     east drain into one of the four major inland bays
     systems.  With the exception of western Garrett
     County, Worcester County is the only Maryland
     jurisdiction whose entire waters  do not flow into
     the Chesapeake Bay.

       Archaeologists believe that human contact with
     what is now Worcester County has been relatively
     brief and notably recent.   Native Americans  did
     not begin to settle in this area until sometime in
     the Twelfth Century.  These American Indians
     were Worcester's first immigrants.   Historians
     believe   that  there  were  never  more  than
     approximately 300 Native Americans in permanent
    „ residence here, but that significant numbers passed
     through  the  area or  rested here  briefly while
     enroute to  other  destinations.   I suppose these
     were Worcester County's first vacationers.

       Early native  settlements  were  located along the
     coastal  plain  and  adjacent  to  the  waterway
     systems;  primarily,  this  translates  into  the
     Pocomoke  River, Nassawango   Creek, and the
     Coastal Bays and their tributaries.   They hunted
     the rich forests,  fished the streams,  rivers  and
     bays, and they began to cultivate the fertile soils.

        The first European settlers moved into the area
     through what is now Virginia in the latter portion
 Page 20
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
of the 1600's.  Then, as today, the region was
geographically remote; consequently, the area was
slow in growing.  The primary activities of these
peoples were little  different  from those of the
Native Americans: principally hunting, fishing,
agriculture, and similar extractive activities.

   The County grew slowly through the 1700's and
into the  1800's.   As  there  was  a surplus of
available land, and waterways were of significant
importance, the early populations tended to be well
dispersed.  What concentrations that existed, were
primarily aligned along the transportation corridors
that these waterways represented. It was not until
the  1800's  that people  began to congregate in
towns and villages in appreciable numbers.

   The advent of steam and railroad spurred some
economic and population growth, however, the
area was never  the scene of a massive  influx of
new residents.  The economy  and the population
maintained remarkable stability through  this era.

   Despite   many  changes  and   innovations,
Agriculture's importance as a mainstay of the local
economy has remained undiminished. Historically,
this activity has been the primary source of income
and  employment.    Although of  slightly  less
importance from an employment standpoint today,
farming   and   related   activities  continue  to
determine Worcester's economic well-being.

   Most of the County's most significant growth
occurred after World War  II.  The  role of the
"baby boom", notwithstanding, it is no accident
that  this transformation  occurred in conjunction
with the expansion of this nation's highway and
railway systems during  the 1950's.  The most
notable alterations came about as a consequence of
the Bay Bridge construction.  This advent forged
a closer relationship  between  the Eastern Shore
and  the  balance of the state.   The people of
Southern Delmarva began to focus  on Baltimore
and Washington, and the markets in Delaware and
points  north  declined  in  importance.    These
transportation   improvements   provided   a
tremendous boost for agricultural interests. It also
had  another  effect.  It began an unprecedented
wave of tourism.
   Today,  agriculture  and  tourism  share  the
 spotlight, but other forces are at work as well. A
 tremendous  proportion  of Worcester's  newest
 wave  of immigrants  are  over the age of 55.
 Worcester County is becoming a retirement locale
 for increasingly larger numbers of people. Its low
 piggyback tax is  also attracting large numbers of
 second home purchasers and part time residents.
 This is a benefit to the construction and real estate
 industries. The vast majority of these new citizens
 are establishing residence within the Coastal Bays'
 Watersheds.  The water access, the beaches, the
 gulf courses, and the recreational opportunities
 available to these residents is a tremendous selling
 point.

   As can be seen from the data in the handout,
 Worcester County is beginning to grow extremely
 rapidly.  The County's growth from 1940 to 1969
 was slow, but consistent.   From 1970  onward,
 however, the  rate  of  growth has  increased
 markedly. From  a statewide perspective, or when
 compared  to  East  Coast regional  standards,
 Worcester County with its current  population of
 40,300 is still  comfortably rural.   But when
 compared to historical trends  the  expansion is
 incredible. In  1940, the population was 21,245.
 In less than six decades, the population has nearly
 doubled.  It took nearly three centuries  to reach
 the 1940 total. Current projections indicate that
 we will achieve that number again by 2030.  In
 less than 35 years, we will have tripled the 1940
 figure.

   This rapid growth is not consistent with this
jurisdiction's history, nor is it in proportion to the
 growth being experienced by other Eastern Shore
 counties.  This is vividly illustrated in the table
 that compares Worcester's population growth rate
 with the combined growth rates for the four Lower
 Shore Counties. These statistics suggest that there
 is something  unique or different about Worcester
 County.    Many  would  argue  that  it  is  the
 proximity to the Ocean and other water resources
 that serves as such a draw.  The ramifications of
 that assumption are  a double-edged sword.  On
 one hand, it makes the importance of the bays and
 their  watersheds  more of a priority  from  an
 economic standpoint.  Conversely, preservation
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                       Page 21

-------
issues and natural resource health take on a greater
level of importance.

   The second table emphasizes the importance of
that assessment. Clearly, these growth trends will
continue through the foreseeable future.  In the
coming decades,  it seems that Worcester  County
will  once  again  be on the  receiving  end  of a
disproportionate population expansion.

   There are two additional factors that should be
of  significant  interest  to   any  demographic
discussions relative to the  bays.  First, although
the growth projections and the existing trends for
Worcester  County are noteworthy, they  pale in
consequence when you look at the distribution of
people within the County.  1990 Census  figures
show that 62.2 percent of the County lived within
the watersheds.

   Projections suggest that this percentage will
increase both in  number  and in speed.  Nearly
three-fourths  of  the  County could live  in the
Coastal Bays Watersheds by  the year 2020.  The
second item of interest is that these numbers fail to
consider seasonal population.  These trends reflect
only permanent year-round residents.  During the
Summer, Worcester's population can be  measured
in millions.  For several months of the year, the
coastal  bays  infrastructure is  faced with  tasks
approaching the same magnitude as the large urban
centers that are the sources of these tourists.

   Of equal or greater importance as "how much?"
is "from what source?". Generally, a significant
portion  of  any  population  increase  can  be
attributed  to  natural  growth  (ie.,  total births
outnumbering total deaths).   This Js  true  with
Worcester  County, but it cannot account  for the
explosive  nature  of  this  population rise.    As
previously stated,  in-migration  is  the  culprit.
Voluntary  re-location is the single greatest factor
in Worcester's continuing growth trends.  Since
1990, it has accounted for more than 71 percent of
die County's  growth.  From 1980 to  1990,  in-
migration  represented  120 percent  of the  total
increase. During this decade, the County grew by
4,139  persons,  and  4,977  people moved  to
Worcester County.  This  means that  at least 838
     County residents who were residents before 1980,
     actually moved out of the County by 1990.

        One  final set  of data  is appropriate  for  this
     forum.  Since 1987,  15,887 acres of agricultural
     land has been converted from active farming to
     some other use.  That represents a loss of nearly
     13 percent.  Simultaneously, the total number of
     farms has declined by nearly one-fourth, from 631
     to 474.  It would be tempting to conclude that this
     is due to development, but that assumption would
     not be entirely true.. The majority of it is probably
     due to  conversion for residential purposes, but
     some of it can be attributed to other factors, not
     the least of which  is the conditions under which
     we mandate that  agricultural concerns  operate.
     Another possible explanation is the  trend for
     assimilation of small farms by larger agricultural
     operations.

        Because of time constraints, I have had to cover
     a great many variables in a short period  of time.
     It is probably  not necessary  that we  remember
     each of the statistics which I have cited here.  It is
     more important that we recognize that Worcester
     County and the Coastal Bays area is undergoing a
     metamorphosis; it is in a constant state of change.
     It has been that way for centuries. What is  now
     different is the speed and degree of those changes.

        People sometimes make the mistake of seeing
     nature  as  static  or stopped  in  time.   This is
     probably not the  case with most things,  and it is
     definitely not the  case with Worcester County and
     the Coastal Bays  environment. It may help us to
     remember that the entire Delmarva Peninsula was
     created by  change,  and  it  is   still  changing,
     growing and evolving. The single most important
     and dominant factor in that evolution has  been the
     role that man has played in'it.  That is why it is
     most important to note that  this factor is  also
     growing,  changing and evolving.  And the speed
     with which it is taking place is increasing ... at
     a rate approaching geometric proportion.
Page 22
DISLMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
               COMPARATIVE HISTORICAL POPULATION GROWTH RATES
1990-95
1980-90
1970-80
1960-70
1950-60
1940-50
STATE

 5.6  Percent
13.3  Percent
 7.5  Percent
 26.5  Percent
 32.3  Percent
 28.7  Percent
WORCESTER

15.1 Percent
13.4 Percent
26.4 Percent
 2.9 Percent
 2.5 Percent
 8.9 Percent
LESR1

 6.9 Percent
12.3 Percent
14.4 Percent
 4.0 Percent
 9.6  Percent
 6.3  Percent
Since 1940, Worcester County has experienced an annual average growth rate of 1.3 percent. During
the same time period, the State and LESR grew by 3.3 and 1.1 percent, respectively.  Since 1990,
however, the state has had an annual growth rate of only 1.1 percent, the LESR has remained
somewhat steady at 1.4 percent, while Worcester County more than doubled that rate to slightly over
3.0 percent  This means that Worcester County has been growing twice as fast as the rest of the
Lower Shore, and more than two  and one-half as fast as the State, since 1990.
              COMPARATIVE RATE OF PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH
 1990-95
 1995-00
 2000-05
 2005-10
 2010-15
 2015-20
       WORCESTER

        15.1 Percent
        7.5 Percent
        6.2 Percent
        4.8 Percent
        3.5 Percent
        3.0 Percent
        LESR

        6.9 Percent
        5.2 Percent
        4.5 Percent
        4.0 Percent
        3.1 Percent
        2.6 Percent
5.6 Percent
5.3 Percent
4.4 Percent
3.5 Percent
3.4 Percent
3.2 Percent
 If the projections for the thirty (30) year period 1990-2020 hold true, the County will experience an
 absolute growth of nearly 12,000 .and a percentage growth rate of 134.2.  It is interesting to note, that
 the County grew by an almost identical amount in the previous thirty (30) year time span (1960-90).
 This growth translates into a factored increase of 147.6 percent.
 1 - LESR: Lower Eastern Shore; includes Dorchester, Somerset, Wicomico and Worcester Counties.

        SOURCE:  U.S. Bureau of the Census, Maryland Office of Planning, and the Worcester
                  County Department of Planning Permits & Inspections.
 DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                                                      Page 23

-------
                  THE COASTAL BAYS WATERSHEDS' COMPONENT
                     (Proportion of Worcester County's Total Population)


                           ABSOLUTE  PERCENTAGE
              1940
              1950
              1960
              1970
              1980
              1990
              1995
              2000
              2010
              2020
10,832
11,974
12,296
12,898
18,057
21,781
26,526
29,122
33,765
39,447
50.9
51.7
51.8
52.8
58.5
62.2
65.8
67.4
68.9
72.1
By 2020, the portion of Worcester County's population lying within the Coastal Bays Watersheds will
approximate the current County total. If these projections hold, the Watershed population component
will nearly double in the time period 1990-2020.  During the same time span the County is only
expected to increase by 56.3 percent.
       SOURCE: Estimates and Projections, 1996; The Worcester County Department of Planning
                Permits & Inpections.
 Page 24
              DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
                  ACCOMACK-NORTHAMPTON PLANNING
                             DISTRICT COMMISSION

                                   James McGowan
   James McGowan is Director of Planning at
the Accomack-Northampton Planning District
Commission, the regional planning commission
for the eastern shore of Virginia.  As Director of
Planning,  Mr.  McGowan provides coastal
resources planning, transportation planning, and
technical assistance  to 2 counties and  19
incorporated towns along the eastern shore.  He
also supervises Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act
implementation for the 13 eastern shore towns in
the Chesapeake Bay watershed.  A graduate of
the  New  York State  University College  at
Plattsburgh,  Mr.   McGowan  also  holds  a
Master's degree in Planning from the University
of Virginia.  Before moving to Virginia, he was
a State Park Manager with the New  York State
Office  of Parks,  Recreation,  and Historic
Preservation.

   The eastern shore of Virginia is that part of
the State which is east of the Chesapeake Bay.
The peninsula is about 70 miles long, which is
as much coast as the rest of Delmarva coastline.
We are,  however,  a lot different than Maryland
and Delaware.

   The eastern shore is both on the Chesapeake
Bay and the Atlantic Ocean.  The  peninsula
varies from about  15  miles to 5 miles in width,
which gives  us a very unique geography. We
have a  lot  of waterfront, both bayside and
seaside  (i.e.,  the  Delmarva  coastal  bay
watershed).  One of the major features is Route
 13 which runs down  the spine of the peninsula
and is pretty  much the divide between  the
Chesapeake  Bay   and  the  Atlantic  Ocean
watersheds.  The Delmarva coastal bays area
comprises the areas to the east, beginning with
Assateague Island and Chincoteague Bay.  We
have 14 barrier islands that run from Assateague
Island to the tip.  The only island on the coast
that is accessible by vehicle is Assateague. This
is  one of the most significant  features  of the
eastern shore of Virginia; the ocean beaches are
not open for development.  They are all either
owned by the Nature Conservancy or by state
and federal agencies.

  The population on the eastern shore in 1990
was 44,764; it has gone up slightly since then.
In 1950, the population was just over 50,000.
It dropped until 1980,  and has since  gone  up
slowly.   Projections to  2010 actually indicate
that we are expected to lose population.  While
we do not have any hard figures  and the net
population is not expected to change much, new
people are coming in and others are leaving.  A
lot of retirees come to the shore or build second
homes.  A lot of young people, however, cannot
get jobs and migrate out.

  Twenty-six  percent  of  the  eastern  shore
population is below the federal poverty level and
the area has an eight percent unemployment rate
(as compared to four percent for the rest of the
state).      So   we  are  an  economically
disadvantaged  area; 2,500 dwellings  (or  17
percent of the housing stock) do not have indoor
plumbing.  This is one of the major issues that
we are dealing with.  We have a lot of programs
to rehabilitate substandard housing and introduce
indoor plumbing, but we still have a long way to
go.
 DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                     Page 25

-------
  As far as the economy, in 1991,  services
were the largest sector of the economy at 22
percent;   manufacturing   was   18   percent;
government was  17 percent; and retail was 14
percent.  Fishing and farming only employed 8
percent,  but fanning  involves a lot more than
the people who work the land and much of the
manufacturing is food processing.   As far as
industrial expansion  possibilities, the poultry
industry is expanding (e.g., Tysons and Perdue),
vegetable production is increasing (e.g., tomato
growers  are moving up  from  Florida,  and
Accomack  County  is  the  largest  vegetable
producer in Virginia), aquaculture is  growing
(e.g., clam growers), and  tourism  is always
increasing (Chincoteague is the biggest area for
tourism and coastal development, but  there is
some development all over the shore).   One of
the new programs is the sustainable development
technology  industrial park  in Cape Charles,
which just  landed a new employer   that is
building  solar panels.  Also, the second home
industry  is  slowly growing.  So, we  do not
expect any major changes, but the potential is
there.   For example, if  the  Chesapeake  Bay
Bridge Tunnel toll is eliminated, there would be
an  immediate change since  there is  a  $10 toll
each way.

  As far as  land use changes, we do not have a
lot  of good data.  Accomack County now has a
GIS system  so we are hoping that we can put it
into a more useable form.  Northampton County
does not have  a GIS system, but is working
towards this. The major factors hi development
are the local ordinances  and future land use
plans.   A ground water plan prepared a few
years ago estimated that the area hi the middle
of  the peninsula, which  is  the  main  ground
water recharge area, has the potential for 37,000
more dwelling units (there are only  21,000
now).  This indicates  that there is a tremendous
capacity  here.  Both  counties are looking into
this situation, with Accomack County updating
their plan and Northampton County developing
a new zoning ordinance.
        In terms of the cost of public actions, while
     there is  not  a  tremendous amount of growth,
     there is  always the need to build  new schools
     and roads as development occurs.  Also, health
     care is a big issue as the number of retirees
     increases. In terms of political activity, there is
     a mix of interests.  Local people want jobs and
     wealthy retirees want to protect the shore.  But
     both groups are thinking about the future.

        We  are also concerned about transportation
     and the future of Route 13 and potential impacts
     on development and preservation efforts.  State
     and federal governments are involved, such as
     through  the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act,
     which  requires  a  100  foot  setback  along
     preservation  areas.    State  ground  water
     regulations are in place, and will hopefully be
     unproved.  Also, state and federal grants help
     fund programs.

        As far as growing pains, there is a lot of
     ground water but it has to be managed properly.
     Industries can cause cones of depression that can
     affect adjacent  water users.  The best way to
     deal with this is to pump water from well fields
     covering 'a larger area  and store it  as public
     water supplies, but only a few exist.   Lack of
     sewers is a problem,  although it can  also slow
     growth.   In order to provide for water  and
     sewer to substandard housing, a central system
     is  needed.  Also, this will hopefully  allow for
     focused growth and prevent sprawl. Currently,
     unsuitable  soils  make  it  difficult to  cluster
     growth.

        Farm  loss  is  also  a concern.    Although
     agriculture only employs  eight percent of the
     population, a lot of related businesses depend on
     it.  We are starting to try some new techniques
     such  as open  space  zoning   and  cluster
     development.   We  need to  do better planning
     and zoning, but Northampton County hired their
     first planner in  1976, and Accomack County did
     not hire a planner until  1990.   Without the
     people, it is hard to know what  to  do.   For
     example, the  build-out  analysis  conducted
     previously   estimated  that  the  37,000  new
Page 26
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
dwelling units would require 5.6 million gallons
per day.  That is as much water as is currently
used  by  all the houses and  industry on  the
eastern shore. Also, it is estimated that the deep
aquifers  on the  eastern  shore  only have a
capacity of 5.5 to 11 million  gallons per day.
Therefore,  we  really  have to look  at  these
issues, but are not being forced to.  It has been
said that people are either inspired to action or
do it out of desperation. I don't think we are at
the desperate stage yet, but hopefully we can act
before it is  too late.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
Page 27

-------
          REPORT ON PRE-CONFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE ON
                              PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS

                                    James M. Falk
                               University of Delaware
                        Sea Grant Marine Advisory Service
                                   Lewes, DE 19958
   For the past 17 years, James Falk has been a
marine, recreation  and tourism specialist at the
University  of Delaware's Sea Grant Marine
Advisory  Service.     He  is  responsible  for
developing and  tabulating the pre-conference
questionnaire  that  -was  received  by  many
participants.  This  questionnaire is only one of
the numerous applied research studies Mr. Falk
has conducted to help resource managers better
understand  the  perceptions  and attitudes  of
different user groups.

Introduction

   During the  late  winter, 1996,  a sample  of
residents living around Delmarva's coastal bays
were mailed a survey instrument seeking their
input  and attitudes about a number  of  issues
related to the environmental and economic health
of these important  coastal ecosystems. Eleven
hundred questionnaires were mailed to a  cross-
section of individuals who represented a variety
of  interest groups.   These  groups  included:
farmers,  private    citizens,   environmental
organization representatives, and watermen.  At
the time  of the  current data analysis, 321
respondents had replied to the survey.

Who Are Coastal  Bay Respondents

   Coastal bay respondents were predominantly
males (74%) and were, on average, 55 years of
     age. Forty-one percent of the respondents were
     from Maryland, 32 percent resided in Virginia,
     and 24 percent were  residents  of  Delaware.
     Thirty-six percent of respondents indicated that
     they lived on the  bay's waterfront.   Forty
     percent indicated that they lived less than five
     miles from the water  and 24 percent reported
     living  five miles or  greater from  the bays.
     Eighty-nine percent of respondents indicated that
     they recreated on the bays or visited them.

        Sixty percent of respondents reported that they
     were college  graduates  and  one-third  of all
     respondents  indicated  that they  had graduate
     level  education  experiences.    The  largest
     percentage of the responding sample  indicated
     that they were retired  (34%), 15 percent were
     employed in  the farming/agriculture  industry,
     and twelve percent were government employees
     (local,  state or federal).  Twenty-two  percent of
     the  respondents were  employed  in  private
     business,  with 8  percent of this total  being
     tourism-related employment.  Fifty-two percent
     of all respondents had annual family incomes of
     greater  than   $50,000.    Only  three percent
     reported that  they  earned less than $20,000
     annually.    About  one-third   (34%)  earned
     between $30,000 and $50,000 annually.
Page 28
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
How Do  Coastal  Bay  Respondents  Rate
Conditions Around the Bays

  When bay  residents were  asked how they
would rate the "quality of life" (e.g. jobs, clean
environment, public services, etc.) around the
bays, the overall rating was 2.7  (based on a 4-
point scale; with 1 = poor and 4 = outstanding).
Sixty-three percent of the  respondents rate the
"quality of life" either  "good" or "outstanding".

  When a rating for "environmental quality" was
solicited, the average rating was 2.4 (on the 4-
point scale), with 48 percent of the respondents
indicating either "good" or "outstanding". When
a similar rating for "economic prosperity" was
solicited, the average rating was 2.1, with only
one-third of the sample reporting  a "good" or
"outstanding" rating response.  When asked what
they thought of their state's efforts at managing
and protecting their state's bay's resources,  38
percent  responded that their state  did either a
"good"  or "outstanding"  job and  rated  their
actions 2.2.

What Are Coastal Bay Respondents' Feelings
About  the   Role  of  Citizens   and   the
Environment

  When asked what position  they felt citizens
should take with respect to environmental issues,
62 percent believe  that individuals can do much
more to improve the environment, 29 percent
feel individuals would do more, but are confused
about what is good and bad for the environment,
7 percent believe it is basically large companies
who are responsible for environmental problems
and they should solve  them and 3 percent feel
that  since  other people won't make sacrifices
their contributions  won't matter either.

How Do Coastal Bay Respondents Categorize
Themselves on Environmental Issues

  Only 3 percent  of all respondents indicated
that  they  were  generally not  interested  in
environmental  matters.    Thirty-one  percent
indicated  an interest in the environment,  but
seldom do anything about it.  Fifty-six percent
of respondents support political candidates based
on their  environmental stands and 46 percent
donate money to environmental causes. Twenty-
four percent of bay-area residents belong to an
environmental  organization  and  41  percent
belong to two or more environmental groups.

What   Are   Coastal  Bay   Respondents'
Environmental Factors of Greatest Concern

  Respondents were asked to rank a series of
environmental  factors  that were of  greatest
concern to them, using a scale of 1 to 3, with 1
being the most important.  Water quality (218
total responses) and loss of fish/wildlife  habitat
(196 total responses) were most often mentioned
by respondents as issues that were important to
them.  The least mentioned  issues were toxic
waste cleanup (25 total responses) and air quality
(36  total  responses).    When  the  average
importance rating was calculated for each factor
(using  the 3-point  scale, with  1 being most
important), water quality (1.7),  protection of
drinking   water supplies  (1.8)  and loss  of
fish/wildlife habitat (1.9) were rated the highest.
Wastewater  management  (2.4),  open  space
preservation  (2.3), and air quality (2.3) were
rated the  lowest.

What Do Coastal Bay Respondents Feel Are
the Most Serious Water Pollution  Problems
Around the Bays

  Since water quality was mentioned as a major
concern by respondents, their opinions were also
solicited on what they  felt were the most  serious
water  pollution problems  around  the  bays.
Agricultural runoff  (68%) was reported as the
most serious  water pollution concern, followed
by sewage discharge (59%)  and environmental
impacts caused by tourism-related development
(50%).
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                     Page 29

-------
How Do Coastal Bay Respondents Feel About
Growth and Development Issues
     How Do Coastal Bay Respondents Feel About
     Tourism Issues
  Coastal bay respondents were quite candid
about issues related to growth and development.
They were requested to rate the issues using a 5-
point scale,  with 1 = strongly disagree and 5 =
strongly agree.   Respondents  rated  limiting
economic growth around  their  state's coastal
bays a'3.8 on the 5-point scale and 66 percent of
the respondents "agreed" or "strongly agreed"
with the  statement.   Fifty-six  percent of  the
respondents "agreed" or "strongly agreed" with
the statement, I feel my  state's counties  are
growing too  fast  (3.6  rating).    Sixty-three
percent of the respondents "agreed" or "strongly
agreed"  with  the   statement,   industries  and
businesses located around my  state's coastal
bays  contribute  significantly  to   the   local
economy (3.6  rating), however, only 27 percent
"agreed" or "strongly agreed" with the statement
that developing land around my state's coastal
bays provides needed  economic growth  (2.6
rating).

How Do Coastal Bay Respondents Feel About
Agricultural Issues

  Seventy-four  percent  of  the respondents
"agreed" or "strongly agreed" with the statement,
agriculture contributes a great deal economically
to the residents of my state's coastal area (3.9
rating on the 5-point scale). Fifty-seven percent
of the respondents "agreed" or "strongly agreed"
with the statement, agriculture around my state's
coastal   bays  provides  diverse  employment
opportunities for local residents (3.4 rating).
The lowest rated statements related to agriculture
were,  environmental impacts  resulting  from
agriculture practices are relatively minor, with
a  2.7  rating  and  only  28  percent  of  the
respondents "agreeing"  or  "strongly agreeing"
with  the  statement, and  taxes  in  my state's
coastal counties  are  kept low because of
agriculture, with a  2.8 rating and  23 percent
agreement response.
        Coastal   Bay   respondents  reacted   both
     positively and negatively to statements related to
     tourism around the regions coastal bays.   The
     statement that received the most support with 73
     percent  of  the   respondents  "agreeing"  or
     "strongly agreeing" was, long-term planning by
     local governments can control negative impacts
     of tourism on  the environment—the  statement
     received a 4.1 rating (on the  5-point scale).
     Respondents also  reacted  favorably to  the
     statements, the tourism industry provides many
     •worthwhile   employment   opportunities  for
     residents, 3.6 rating and 67 percent agreement
     response and, tourism is one of the  bright spots
     in my state's coastal bay's economic future, 3.4
     rating  and   54  percent agreement  response.
     Respondents did  not  react positively to the
     statements,   the  overall  benefits  of tourism
     outweigh  the negative  environmental impacts,
     2.5 rating and 23 percent "agreeing" or "strongly
     agreeing" and, / support tourism and would like
     to see it become the main industry in and around
     my state's  coastal  bays,  2.7  rating and 27
     percent agreement response.

     What   Future   Issues  Do   Coastal   Bay
     Respondents Feel Are Most Important

        When asked what they  felt  were the  most
     important  future  issues  they  needed to be
     concerned   about,   coastal  bay   respondents
     indicated that protecting the coastal bays from
     environmental degradation (79%) and preserving
     forest, wetland and habitat areas (79%)  were
     most important.  Other issues receiving majority
     support  included  protecting  drinking  water
     supplies (65%) and controlling  growth in coastal
     counties (54%).  The  least important  issues as
     reported by  respondents  included,  addressing
     global environmental issues (18%) and attracting
     new industries and businesses  (20%).
Page 30
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
How Do Coastal Bay Respondents Feel About
Paying More to Improve the Bays

   Sixty-nine percent of respondents indicated
they would pay more taxes or higher prices to
protect and improve the environmental quality of
Delmarva's coastal bays.  They felt user fees
(59%) would be the most preferred mechanism
to collect additional revenues to direct towards
bay  improvements.   The only other revenue
mechanism  that received  close  to majority
support was voluntary private donations,  with 45
percent  of the  respondents  supporting  this
revenue-generating   mechanism.     The  least
supported methods for generating revenues were
property  tax  transfers  (18%) and personal
income taxes (19%).

Conclusions

   This preliminary  analysis  of  coastal  bay
residents provides a "snapshot" of how they feel
about  many issues and concerns affecting  the
health  of the  region's  coastal bays.    The
information present  is   based on frequency
responses for all respondents collectively and is
by no means exhaustive.  There are additional
methods  for  analyzing  the data  which  can
provide a thorough picture of how  respondents
feel  about coastal bay concerns.  These could
include comparing results by state of residence
(Maryland vs. Delaware vs. Virginia)  or by
occupational status (retired vs. agriculture  vs.
private business).  This  further analysis  will
provide  a  more-effective  way to  approach
management and policy concerns in the different
jurisdictions.

   This study -was supported by the  University of
Delaware Sea Grant College Program and the
Delaware Center for the Inland Bays. A special
thanks  is also  extended  to  the agencies  and
organizations who assisted in mailing the survey
questionnaires to their clientele groups and to
University of Delaware,  College  of  Marine
Studies' graduate students Cecelia Linder and
Lexia  Valdes for their assistance during various
phases of the project.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
Page 31

-------
            SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT:  A FRAMEWORK
                              FOR A NEW CENTURY

                                   Peggy Duxbury
                 President's Council on Sustainable Development
   The  originally  scheduled  speaker,  Molly
Harris  Olson,  Executive  Director  of  the
President's Council on Sustainable Development
(PCSD)  was  unable  to attend due to other
commitments.   Ms. Olson -was represented by
Peggy Duxbury,  Coordinator of the  PCSD's
Principles, Goals,  and Definitions Task Force.
This Task Force was responsible for bringing
together, integrating, and synthesizing all of the
work of  the  many  subcommittees  and work
groups that comprise the President's Council.
Prior to working for the PCSD, Ms. Duxbury
held a one-year faculty research appointment at
Harvard  Business School where she  helped
develop   a   curriculum   on   environmental
management.  She  holds a Bachelor's degree in
Political Science from Old Dominion University
and a Master's degree in Public Administration
from  the  Kennedy School of Government at
Harvard University.

   It's extremely exciting for me to be here this
evening.  This is the first group that we have
met with  since the Council members met with
President  Clinton  and Vice President Gore 24
hours ago to deliver the PCSD's report, which is
a unanimous consensus document on their vision
for sustainable development in the United States.
It's also  very fitting  that as the PCSD starts
winding down our efforts, I am in a filled-to-
capacity  room with   individuals  who   are
interested in taking these concepts and applying
them to a regional level.  Without a doubt, the
"just do it" crowd will be a crowd like this  one.
       I thought I'd begin by giving  you  some
     background  on  the  concept  of  sustainable
     development and its genesis.  It is a fairly new
     buzzword; I remember  doing a  search for the
     term  "sustainable  development"  at  Harvard
     Library  and not really  finding the term until
     about four or five years  ago.  Then we will talk
     about the work of the Council and the contents
     of the report.

       Beginning with  the  environment,  while a
     doom-and-gloom scenario is extreme, is it not a
     crisis when:

       • 15  million people  die annually  from
         poverty-related causes?
       • 35,000 children die daily from diseases that
         are entirely avoidable?
       • 100-300 species  are lost daily from this
         planet?
       • There are holes in the ozone layer?
       • The climate is undergoing changes?
       • Fish stocks disappear?
       • Wildlife habitats are devastated?
       • Soils erode?
       • 1,500 scientists, including 99 Nobel Prize
         Laureates, issue a warning to humanity that
         human beings  and the natural order are on
         a collision  course?

       The  planet   is  in  a   severe  state   of
     disequilibrium.  Humanity cannot survive when
     one-third of the  world is wealthy and two-thirds
     of the world is in poverty, and most of those, in
     devastating poverty. The planet cannot sustain
 Page 32
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
20  percent  of the population  consuming  80
percent of the world's resources. It cannot serve
as  a repository  for  industrial  waste,  while
providing clean  air,  clean  water,  and  soils
sufficient to support  food  and  an  expanding
population, all at the same time.

  These crises  bring me to  the  concept of
sustainable development. In the last decade, this
concept   has   gained  widespread   political
legitimacy, not just here in the United States, but
across the world.  How can we restore some
balance to that  ledger?  How can we restore
economic   prosperity,  social   equity,   and
environmental integrity,  all at  the same time?
With that said, sustainable development is really
the politics of hope.  It is the politics of looking
towards  the future with the idea that we do
control our destiny and fate.

  To understand sustainable development, we
also have to understand its historical context.
You could argue that many  of these concepts
existed  for  centuries.  You can  find many of
these ideas and philosophies in the Old and New
Testaments, as well as many of our tribal nations
in the Americas.   But as a modern  political
philosophy,  sustainable development really had
its genesis in the mid- to late-1980s.  It was at
that time that the United Nations  formed the
Bruntland Commission, which had leaders from
the developed and developing countries.  They
published Our Common Future, which contained
many  recommendations,  and  perhaps  most
useful, a definition of sustainable development.
While this concept does mean different things to
different people,  there is  now  some consensus
regarding this definition, which is also used by
the PCSD.  This  definition states that:

"Sustainable development is development  that
meets   the  needs  of  the  present  without
compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs. "

   Sustainable development then really rests on
three interrelated concepts: that you cannot have
environmental   integrity   without   economic
prosperity;  conversely,   you  cannot   have
economic  prosperity  without  environmental
integrity.    Underpinning  all  of this  is the
fundamental need that all human beings have a
basic level of social welfare.   In other words,
these three issues  are  interwoven in  the  most
fundamental way,  and yet  in  a way that  most
societies have  failed to recognize  or appreciate.

  It was because  of the  discussions  of the
Bruntland Commission that in 1992 leaders from
across the globe  came  together at the  Rio
Summit. One of the many agreements that came
out  of  the  Summit  was  to form  national
strategies for sustainable development.  It was
that commitment that caused President Clinton to
form the PCSD. He asked the Council, which is
comprised of 25 individuals (8 industry leaders,
5 environmentalists, a number of key Cabinet
positions, and representatives of several  civic
societies) to develop recommendations on how
the United States  should address the  rubric of
sustainable development.

  Before going on to the PCSD's activities and
findings, I want to quickly discuss who is the
United States.  We are the wealthiest nation on
earth; we consume, produce and waste more per
capita than any other country on this planet. We
are very religious  (more people  participate in
organized religion  than  in almost  any  other
developed  country), fiercely  independent, and
skeptical  of government  (sometimes  healthy,
sometimes destructive).  And we spend a lot on
environmental protection — 2.5% of our GDP.
We  also have a lot of fears; e.g., crime, the
federal deficit, and quality of education.

  The PCSD examined all of these issues three
years ago under the President's direction to be
bold and creative.  It was a daunting time; jobs
vs.  the environment were viewed as conflicting
concepts.  The  25 members of the Council,
leaders  in their respective fields, each brought
their own perspective to the process.  They met
four times per year during the last three years at
locations  nationwide.  Eight Task forces were
formed that presided over  dozens of meetings
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                     Page 33

-------
involving thousands of individuals.  Mostly the
Council members listened and tried to learn what
issues  need to be considered in developing a
national strategy.

  First, the Council members needed to develop
a shared vision of the future, which took about
eight months to develop.  From there, they  set
goals through their Task Forces.  Ultimately,
they developed  approximately 350  goals that
were very specific, but cumbersome due to their
number.   Therefore,  the  list  of goals for the
future was narrowed down to the following 10:

  Health and the environment
  Economic prosperity
  Equity
  Conservation of nature
  Stewardship
  Communities
  Civic engagement
  Population
  International leadership
  Education

Following the establishment of goals, the PCSD
set  indicators of progress  or benchmarks  to
measure progress towards  goals.

  After  establishing  goals  and measures,  the
Council started looking  at ways to change how
we  do  business  today.   This  information  is
contained in  the  second chapter of the report,
entitled  "A   New Framework  for  a New
Century", which focuses on the environment and
the  regulatory framework. It examines how we
can regulate better, be more cost effective, and
achieve the same environmental goals. First and
foremost, the  Council agreed that our existing
environmental framework developed over the
past 25  years is  a  good one.   Given  the
backgrounds of the  individuals and the political
climate at the time, this was a fairly profound
consensus.    The   Council   members  also
recognized that  the  framework is  far from
perfect, and at times, needs to be more cost-
effective, goal-oriented, performance-oriented,
and flexible.  The framework needs to encourage
     more partnerships between agencies,  levels of
     government, and stakeholders.  Specific policy
     recommendations  developed by the  Council
     include:  increasing the cost-effectiveness of the
     existing  regulatory  structure;  allowing  for
     alternative,   performance-based  management
     systems  to   go   beyond  compliance;   and
     encouraging voluntary systems for corporations
     of extended product responsibility.  One success
     story involved Maiden Mills in Massachusetts
     that  uses  recycled materials,  stayed in  an
     industrial  "brownfields"  site,   hired  a  70%
     minority workforce, worked with the community
     to clean the river, and ultimately, gained national
     attention when it burned down before Christmas
     and  committed  to rebuilding.    The  other
     recommendations in this section deal with the
     government's  macroeconomic tools;  e.g., tax
     shifts and subsidy reforms to change economic
     policy   to   encourage   more   sustainable
     development.

       The next chapter addresses natural  resource
     stewardship.  The Natural Resource Task Force
     used watersheds as its unit of study. The  most
     important lesson learned was collaboration across
     boundaries,  agencies, and  stakeholders.   The
     Task Force also emphasized the importance of
     ecosystem management based on examinations
     of sustainable agriculture, sustainable  forestry,
     and restoring fisheries.   One  of the success
     stories  involved  the  striped  bass  in  the
     Chesapeake Bay. Another important  finding was
     the need for better information  to identify the
     nation's biological heritage. A final priority was
     biodiversity conservation.

       Another critical part of the report addresses
     population  and consumption.  Population  is an
     issue for the United States as well as developing
     countries; we  are the third largest nation in the
     world and are the fastest growing developed
     country.   Our  comparatively  fast population
     growth and extremely high consumption rate is
     not a sustainable combination and should not be
     mimicked by the rest of the world.  Reductions
     in population  are eclipsed by our consumption
Page 34
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
rate, and vice versa.  Equity considerations are
also interrelated.

  Finally,  perhaps  the heart  of the  work
performed by the Council was at the community
level.  It quickly became apparent that the lack
of a  local government  representative  on  the
Council was a loss,  but was compensated for
somewhat by the meetings that were held.  One
notable  success  story   was   Chattanooga
Tennessee; 20 years ago it was identified as the
dirtiest city in the country and was losing jobs.
Over several years, different groups collaborated
and turned  the city around until it was listed by
EPA four years ago as one of the best places in
the  United  States to live.

  While the report  contains  bold ideas,  the
members agreed that the process was the most
remarkable accomplishment of the PCSD. This
process entailed really  listening and learning
from each other over several years.  In general,
it was a process of consensus that leads to better
decisions and policies.  The  challenge is  now
captured by the phrase, "To plan is human, to
implement, divine." The report,  itself, contains
a lot of good  ideas,  only about one-third of
which  are  aimed  at the federal government.
Implementation will have to come  from groups
like yourselves.  At the federal level, President
Clinton and Vice President Gore have given a
commitment to start implementing  some of the
ideas over  the next eight or nine months.  The
report  will help guide  implementation at other
levels  of government and  can be most easily
obtained   via  the   Internet    at:
PCSD@IGC.APC.ORG, or it can be purchased
from the Government Printing Office.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
Page 35

-------
     REPORT ON BREAKOUT GROUPS TO DEVELOP A COMMON
      VISION FOR ACHIEVING BOTH HEALTHY ECONOMY AND
      ENVIRONMENT, FOCUSING ON SPECIFIC COASTAL ISSUES
Introduction

  On the afternoon of the first day, a series of
breakout   groups  were   held   to   discuss
environmental and economic issues relevant to
Delmarva's coastal bays.  While there are many
issues, all conference participants were assigned
to one of the following four areas, which  best
reflected both  environmental  and  economic
interests as determined by responses to the  pre-
conference  questionnaire:

  Tourism  and Recreation
  Residential Growth and Development
  Fisheries, Shellfisheries, Aquaculture;
  Agriculture:  Poultry, Crops and Forestry

  The  goal  for  each group  was to enable
participants to better understand and respect the
wide range  of perceptions and opinions involved
in  working  toward  a  common  vision  for
achieving both  a  robust economy and a health
environment  for  the Delmarva Coastal  Bay
watersheds.   Due  to the  large  number of
participants, two groups were held for each topic
for a  total of eight  groups.   In  assigning
participants to  groups,  the  organizers of the
conference  tried to  maximize the  diversity of
backgrounds and interests represented, based on
information  supplied  on   the   conference
registration form.  Each  group was lead by
facilitators who had earlier completed training to
standardize  the  process  and   recording  of
findings.

  On arrival to the breakout rooms, participants
were given  a brief introduction to the purpose of
      the session and access to copies of ground rules
      for effective meetings.   Each group was then
      subdivided into three smaller groups to identify
      commonalities   and   differences   among
      participants,  and  later,  to  identify influential
      factors for their particular topic area over the
      past 20 years.  On an individual basis, small
      group members were next instructed to list their
      expectations  as to what the future would be like,
      given the factors previously identified, if nothing
      different was done.  Statements were shared on
      a round robin basis with  other  small  group
      members, before reconvening the large group for
      discussion. Based on input from the three small
      groups,   a  single  list  was  developed  of
      expectations  for the future if nothing different
      occurs.  Finally,  while  still in the  large  group
      setting, participants were asked on a round robin
      basis to identify elements of their ideal future,
      linking  them to  previously  discussed themes.
      Each  group  also  selected  a spokesperson to
      report on their findings.

        Following dinner, the spokesperson for each
      of  the  eight  groups  reported  back  to  all
      conference participants on their findings.  Flip
      charts of the  large group findings concerning the
      future if nothing changes and the ideal  future
      were displayed along the walls of the  meeting
      room (flip charts  of the small group  findings
      concerning  commonalities,  differences,   and
      influential factors  were  compiled for  future
      review).  At  the conclusion of the presentations,
      all participants were asked to affix colored dots
      next to the statements that most closely captured
      their own beliefs (each participant was provided
      with seven dots that could be used separately for
Page 36
-DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
seven  different statements,  or  combined  for
emphasis).   The  different colors  of the dots
represented the backgrounds of the participant as
follows:

   Agriculture
   Government
   Business and Industry
   Recreation and Tourism
   Fisheries
   Academia
   Citizens
   Public Interest Group

   The remainder  of this  section presents  the
large group findings as listed on the flip charts.
The findings do not necessarily  suggest group
consensus. The total number and composition of
dots associated with  particular  statements is
identified,   where   applicable.      Statements
receiving the most dots are listed at the top of
each  group.    (Note:   when  several  popular
statements  appeared next to each other,  a "best
guess" has been made with respect to which
statement is intended based on the proximity of
the dot.)

Tourism and Recreation. Group #1

Future if Nothing Changes

   • Loss of habitat (1 dot: government)
   • Loss of open space (1 dot:  citizen)
   • Transportation congestion
   • Surface water quality  deterioration
   • Aquatic resources stress/fisheries decline
   • Higher taxes and cost of living
   • Increased storm damage
   • Population  increase
   • Decline  in supply and quality of
     ground water
   • Urbanization
   • Casinos
   • Infrastructure demand increases
Ideal Future

   • Bay ferry, bikes, public transportation (14
     dots:     6  recreation  and   tourism,  4
     government,  1 business and industry, 1
     fisheries, 1 citizen, 1 public interest group)
   • Restoration of bays (11  dots:  5 recreation
     and tourism, 3 government, 2 academia, 1
     business and industry)
   • More ecotourism (8 dots: 4 government, 2
     recreation and tourism, 2  public  interest
     group)
   • More public water front access (6 dots: 4
     government, 2 recreation and tourism)
   • Limit  intensive recreation to Ocean City (5
     dots:   3  government,  2 recreation and
     tourism)
   • Better fish and shellfish - more and bigger
     (4 dots:  2 government, 1  public  interest
     group,  1 business and industry)
   • Bring  money and leave it here; just send
     money (don't come)
   • Wider  beach (3  dots:   2 government, 1
     business and industry)
   • Balance between business and residential
   • More cultural activities - theater, arboretum,
     etc. (1 dot: recreation and tourism)
   • Safer   boating   practices   -  licenses,
     education/certification   (2   dots:      1
     government, 1  business and industry)
   • 15 more golf courses (1 dot: recreation and
     tourism)

Tourism and Recreation. Group #2

Future if Nothing Changes

   • Decline of experience and quality of life -
     too many people; conflicts over diminished
     resources; fisheries
   • West shore  would  have to  support east
     shore
   • Deterioration of natural resources
   • Change in type of recreation - gambling
   • Aging population puts increased burden on
     local government services
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                     Page 37

-------
                            treatment  -  no
                             (4   dots:     2
   •  Conflict of tourism vs. aging population -
     this will change the political landscape as
     values of society change
   •  Demographic   changes   and  different
     recreational needs

Ideal Future

   •  Increase density in designated growth areas
     and protect agricultural  land and forests
     from conversion to other uses (28 dots:  9
     government, 8 agriculture, 4 public interest
     group, 3 business and industry, 2 recreation
     and tourism, 1 fisheries, 1 academia)
   •  Restrict development to areas with planned
     infrastructure  (5 dots:  3 recreation and
     tourism,  1  government,  1 public  interest
     group)
   •  Innovative  wastewater
     sewers,   limit  growth
     government, 2 citizen)
   •  Transfer of development rights or purchase
     development   rights   (3   dots:      all
     government)
   •  Restrict shoreline  development, maintain
     natural habitat (3  dots:   2 public  interest
     group, 1 government)
   •  Clean  saltwater  (2 dots:   both public
     interest group)
   •  Uncongested roads
   •  Federally funded sewer systems
   •  Abundant  fish   and  wildlife  (1   dot:
     recreation and tourism)
   0  Ability of people to enjoy the area without
     negative impact (1 dot:  citizen)
   •  More hands-on educational opportunities -
     cultural, historical, and natural resources (2
     dots:  1 business and industry, 1 academia)
   •  Planned  siting   of  marinas,  discharge
     controls (1 dot:  government)
   •  Purchase more parkland  (1  dot:  public
     interest group)
   •  Greenways (2 dots:    1  government,  1
     fisheries)
   •  Sustainable recreation and tourism -  only
     dependent  on this location,  low  impact
     recreation,  sustainable development,  non-
     consumptive recreation
                                                  • Promote/encourage year-round vs. seasonal
                                                    tourism
                                                  • Develop ecotourism

                                               Residential Growth and Development,
                                               Group #1

                                               Future if Nothing Changes
Increase in golf courses
Loss of habitat and sense of place
Decline  in  quality   of  life  and  more
development
Decline in quality of environment
Decline in farmland  and disappearance of
farms
Water quality of bays reduced
Development on mainland will increase
Decline and demise of watermen
Decline in water quality
Increase in number of immigrants
Shift in job availability to service jobs
Sprawl - conversion of agricultural land to
residential
High-density on coastal highway
Fragmentation of ecosystem
Higher demands on government facilities
Higher taxes
Collapse of ecosystems
Overcrowding
Tragedy of the commons
Interstate highways
Impact of natural disasters
Increased urban runoff
Unplanned "strip" development
Water shortage - polluted aquifers, amount
of  groundwater  vs.   demand,  declining
quality for recreation
Lowering of expectations for quality of life
Depletion of resources - fishing,  farming,
etc.
Increased crime as population  increases
"Negative  feedback"  of decreasing life
quality may decrease development pressure
Page 38
                                          DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
Ideal Future
     Population control (27  dots:   13 public
     interest group, 10 government, 2 academia,
     2 citizen)  .
     Mandatory environmental education as part
     of school (9 dots:  6 public interest group,
     2 government, 1 agriculture)
     Increased  stewardship   (7  dots:      3
     government,  2  public  interest group,  1
     agriculture, 1 citizen)
     Sustainable  development  (4  dots:    all
     government)
     Compromise   between  developers  and
     environmentalists  for land  restrictions  (4
     dots:   2 government,  2  public  interest
     group)
     Eliminate political influence  (4 dots:   2
     public interest  group,  1   agriculture,   1
     government)
     Public   education,   appreciation,   and
     awareness  (3  dots:    all  public  interest
     group)
     Similar environment elsewhere
     Systematic approach to planning
     Watershed planning (3 dots:  2 government,
     1 public  interest group)
     Stricter land use control
     Effective buffers next to water (3  dots:   2
     government, 1 citizen)
     Public realization  and acceptance  to  limit
     growth (3 dots:  2 public interest group, 1
     government)
     Lack of effective critical areas
     Greater use of conservation easements  (3
     dots:     2   public   interest  group,   1
     government)
     Restoration of wetlands and barrier islands
     (5 dots:  2 government, 2  public interest
     groups, 1 citizen)
     Better understanding of habitat  (1  dot:
     public interest group)
     Preservation  of biodiversity (2 dots:   1
     government, 1 public interest group)
     Serious effect for land base runoff (2  dots:
     1 business and industry, 1  public interest
     group)
   • Sustainable economic development (1 dot:
     public interest group)
   • Prevent litter and solid waste from entering
     waterways   (3  dots:    1   agriculture,   1
     government, 1 public interest group)
   • Increased profitability  of  agriculture  (3
     dots:  agriculture)
   • Intensive   20-year   study   (2   dots:
     government)
   • Determine   carrying  capacity   (1  dot:
     government)
   • "Tragedy of   the   Commons"  required
     reading  in high  school (1 dot:   public
     interest group)

Residential Growth and Development.
Group #2

Future if Nothing Changes

   • Failed infrastructure - water, transportation,
     schools, sewage, stormwater management,
     public utilities
   • Decline in quality of life -  crime, property
     taxes, traffic, siltation of channels, cost of
     living
   • Increase in human population - loss of open
     space, decline in air and water quality, loss
     of habitat,  loss  of  woodlands,  loss  of
     agriculture
   • Some  cause  for  optimism   -   through
     planning  and awareness, NEP
   • Loss of biological resources -  habitat loss,
     water quality
   • Economic opportunities - limited;  rich get
     richer
   • Human health related problems
   • Funding  shifts/ ^ change  in priorities  for
     government
   • Northern  bays could serve as harbinger for
     future of southern bays

Ideal Future

   • Ecological quality index to educate public -
     for  each  coastal  bay  (20  dots:    14
     government, 3 academia, 2 citizen,  1 public
     interest group)
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                      Page 39

-------
    Adaptive  reuse  of  abandoned/degraded
    properties (13 dots: 6 government, 4 public
    interest,  1  agriculture,  1  tourism  and
    recreation, 1 academia)
    More shoreline/marsh preservation (9 dots:
    4  government,  2  citizen,  1 fisheries,  1
    academia,  1 public interest group)
    More    community   involvement   in
    conservation  issues/decisions (8  dots:   5
    government, 1 academia, 1 citizen, 1 public
    interest group)
    Expanded    environmental   education
    programs   in  schools  (8  dots:     2
    government,  2  business  and industry,  2
    public interest group, 1 academia, 1 citizen)
    County planning 50 years in future (6 dots:
    government)
    Habitat preservation (6 dots:   2 business
    and industry, 2  citizen, 2 public interest
    group)
    Would like to see it look like Outer Banks
    (3 dots: 2 government, 1 citizen)
    Control   growth   with   adequate
    environmental protection
    Farmland preservation (4 dots: 2 citizen, 1
    agriculture, 1 government)
    More  compatible  industry  (2   dots:   1
    government, 1 tourism and recreation)
    Increased wildlife (1 dot: citizen)
    Clean  air and water (4 dots: 3 citizen, 1
    government)
    Land use decisions that reflect cumulative
    impact (4 dots:   2 government,  1 business
    and industry, 1 public interest group)
    Higher  standard of  design  applied  to
    commercial and residential development (1
    dot: business and industry)
    More  restrictive  land  use  regulations (3
    dots:  all government)
    Balanced   ecosystem   (3   dots:     all
    government)
     Fisheries. Shellfisheries and Aquaculture,
     Group #1

     Future if Nothing Changes

        • Diminished  commercial  and  recreational
          opportunities
        • Increase in aquaculture
        • Increased degradation of water quality
        • Altered species composition
        • Shift away from fisheries activities to less
          outdoor-oriented activities
        • Loss of species/biodiversity
        • Increasingly restrictive regulations
        • Increased    development   because    of
          degradation of environment
        • Decreased property values
        • Public  desensitization
        • Biotechnology may save us
        • Death of the bay

     Ideal Future

        • More  conservation  areas  -  land,  water,
          wetland, forests (22 dots: 9 government, 4
          public  interest group,  2  recreation  and
          tourism, 2 fisheries, 2 citizen,  1 agriculture,
          1 academia,  1 business and industry)
        • Fishermen more conservation-minded (10
          dots:   5  government,  2  public  interest
          group,   1   agriculture,   1  business  and
          industry,  1 fisheries)
        • Increased   eco-tourism  (10  dots:     5
          government,  1  business and industry, 1
          recreation   and  tourism,   1  fisheries,  1
          academia,  1 public interest group)
        • Eliminate  nutria (8 dots:  5 public interest
          group,  2  government,  1  business  and
          industry)
        • Increase   in  aquaculture  (8  dots:    1
          agriculture, 1 government,  1  business and
          industry,   1   recreation  and  tourism,  1
          fisheries,  1 academia,  1  citizen,  1  public
          interest group)
        • Improved   water  quality  (5  dots:    2
          recreation and  tourism,  1  government, 1
          academia, 1 public interest group)
Page 40
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
   • Participative   decision   making   by  all
     involved parties (5 dots: 4 government,  1
     recreation and tourism)
   • Sustainable fisheries at  level above/higher
     than today's (3 dots:  all government)
   • Fisheries at pre-settlement levels
   • No aquaculture
   • High quality  development  that  increases
     property values (3 dots:  all government)

Fisheries, Shellfisheries and Aquaculture.
Group #2

Future if Nothing Changes
     Big brother regulations
     Reduced   opportunities   -  recreational,
     commercial
     Economic collapse - unemployment, crime,
     drug trafficking, desperation
     Twilight of the sea
     Eventual environmental destruction
     Eventual end of water-based recreation
     Degraded habitat and ecosystem
     Deteriorated quality of life
     Changes in economy
     Diminished water quality
     Increased anoxic  levels - algae  blooms
     leading  to deaths in higher organisms like
     shellfish
     Vacancy signs on tackle shops
     Increased closures  of areas for swimming,
     fishing,  and clamming
     Increased disgruntled  public  demanding
     government solutions
     No more fishing/crabbing (recreational and
     commercial)
     Decreased aesthetic and financial value of
     property
     Greater residential development of wetlands
     Total  government  regulation to point of
     socialism
     More expensive seafood
     Huge trade deficits
     No more kids with chicken necks on strings
     Imitation seafood
     Increased reliance on other fish populations
     and eventual destruction of those species
     More  expensive  and  difficult  to  solve
     problems
     High unemployment
     Increased  preservation  of  shorelines  to
     protect  commercial properties   -  beach
     restoration
     Inability to get away from jet skis -  only
     use for water is recreational
     Fish wars - warring anglers between nations
     and/or  states due to diminished stocks
     More steak restaurants on coastal highway
     More large commercial shopping centers -
     increased development
     "Coastal bays landfill project" -  "Fill  it in
     and build  on it"
     Job  loss  due' to  decreased  fish/shellfish
     stocks
     Loss of reasons to improve environment
     Need new development to replace jobs, but
     development  will   further  reduce  water
     quality
     Expensive seafood
     Loss of desirable species may encourage
     "trash" species
     May lose tradition of "watermen" culture
     Increased regulation of all fishing
     Loss of recreational industry
     Aquaculture will expand
     Diminished  food  stocks  (and  drinking
     water)
     Increasing stress on reduced fish  stocks
     Further loss of habitat
     Algal blooms/"red tide"
     Anoxia
     Sediment contamination
     Altered natural landscape
Ideal Future
     No  more jet skis (34  dots:   16 public
     interest group, 9 government, 4 recreation
     and tourism,  3  fisheries, 1  academia,  1
     citizen)
     Restoration of submerged aquatic vegetation
     (22  dots: 9 government, 6 public interest,
     3  academia,  2  citizen,  1  business  and
     industry, 1 fisheries)
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                     Page 41

-------
     Greater understanding of coastal processes
     and ecosystems (8 dots:  4 government, 2
     public interest group, 1 academia, 1 citizen)
     Healthy   economic   base    built   on
     environmentally-friendly andenvironmental
     businesses   (7   dots:     3   citizen,   2
     government,  1  business and  industry, 1
     academia)
     Rural character of area maintained (6 dots:
     4 government, 2 public interest group)
     More wetlands (6 dots:   4 government, 2
     public interest group)
     No more waterfront development
     Carefully planned communities
     Partnerships between schools, government,
     and business to  take hard  science and
     transform it to marketable products (2 dots:
     both public interest group)
     Sustained natural  resources
     Economic growth (4 dots:  2 business and
     industry, 1 citizen, 1 public interest group)
     Look like it did 75 years ago (2 dots:  1
     government, 1 fisheries)
     Ocean  and  bay  nature  reserves (3  dots:
     government)
     Increased awareness by public of what has
     been done and what can be done (1 dot:
     citizen)
     Aquaculture developed so it is a household
     word (2  dots:  1 government, 1 business
     and industry)
     No  more marine debris/trash  (2 dots:   1
     government, 1 public interest group)
     All  shoreline  development   halted  and
     beaches returned to natural state for public
     use (4  dots:  2  government,  1  citizen, 1
     public interest group)
     Open shellfish beds
     Diversified use of bays
     Sustainable fisheries stocks/industry
     Controlled development - designate natural
     areas
     Local Pride  (1 dot: citizen)
     Sustainable use of all resources (4 dots:  all
     government)
     Goal of "zero discharge" (1 dot: citizen)
     Commerce,  agriculture,  marine  industry,
     tourism,  and residents living  in harmony
          within  the  natural  resource  capacity;
          enriched by their environment  and each
          other (3 dots:  2 government, 1 academia)
        • Opportunities   for   present  and  future
          generations to  enjoy  and use resources and
          the natural  environment - leave better than
          we found it

     Agriculture. Poultry, Crops and Forestry,
     Group #1

     Future if Nothing Changes

        • Decreased  land  available  for agricultural
          development due to production
        • Decreased water supply due  to irrigation,
          development demands, pollution
        • Increased cost of living
        • More  productivity and efficiency per acre
          due to technologies and new products
        • Decreased agricultural productivity due to
          soil degradation, disease, and pests
        • Less farming/less family farms
        • Domination by forest  monoculture and
          many  poultry farms
        • Less concern for local agricultural interests
        • Continued stakeholder conflicts
        • Health concerns
        • Increased population
        • Less tourists
        • Habitat  and wetlands loss
        • Less open space
        • Reduced recreational opportunities
        • Decreased surface water quality
        • More   transportation  and   infrastructure
          demands
        • Waste management problems
        • Increased pesticide and herbicide use

     Ideal Future

        • Regional planning based on ecosystems and
          better   knowledge   of  ecosystems  and
          function - forestry, agriculture, poultry, and
          other  uses (31  dots:   8 government,  6
          agriculture,  6  public interest  group,  5
          academia, 3 citizen, 2 fisheries, 1 recreation
          and tourism)
Page 42
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
   • Protection of sensitive and critical areas (26
     dots:   14  government,  6 public interest
     group, 2 fisheries, 2 citizen, 1 agriculture,
     1 academia)
   • Education  of  problems  and  solutions,
     including  regulated   community    and
     stakeholders (23 dots:  13 government,  5
     public  interest  group,  3  academia,  1
     recreation and tourism, 1 citizen)
   • Population control (15  dots:    10  public
     interest group, 2 government,  2 citizen,  1
     agriculture)
   • Tri-state  agriculture planning for estuary
     preservation (9  dots:   5  public interest
     group, 3  academia, 1 government)
   • Promote  "green" farming practices - reduce
     pesticide/herbicide   use   and   increase
     recycling or  containment  (9  dots:    6
     government,  2 public  interest  group,  1
     academia)
   • Involve stakeholders - increased cooperation
     (2 dots:   1  business  and  industry,  1
     academia)
   • Balanced approach  to   land  use  and
     management (1 dot: public interest  group)
   • Incentives for multiple land use (2 dots:  1
     government, 1 academia)
   • Agricultural diversity
   • More  understanding of how market forces
     affect local farming practices  (3 dots:   1
     agriculture, 1 government, 1 public interest
     group)
   • Resource management  enforcement  and
     strengthening existing policy

Agriculture, Poultry, Crops and Forestry.
Group #2

Future if Nothing Changes

   • Development will  swallow up  forestry  -
     short-term  gains  and  long-term loss of
     sustainable use
   • No forests - development of farms
   • Less farmers/less land - increase in  land
     values
   • Less farmers/more  poultry
   • Factory farms - growing food for chickens
     Politics/less subsidies
     Less conservation planning/more  adverse
     impacts
     Equality loss
     Ocean will move in
     Changes in lifestyle
     Population increase
     Conversion    of   farmland   to
     residential/commercial  uses
     Fragmented forest/coastal lands
     Production will decrease due to land/water
     pollution
     Increasing amount of arable land owned by
     agribusiness
     Loss of open space, rural life, biodiversity
     Reduction in quality  of drinking water
     Forestry and agriculture will diversify and
     intensify
     Increase in impervious  surface, decrease in
     water quality
     Agriculture becoming more friendly
     Loss of forestry market
     More efficient  use  of  farmland/poultry
     industry
     Government will streamline regulations for
     conservation planning
     Increase in nonpoint  source pollution
     Too many people/birth  control
     Pollution   decreasing   through
     technology/BMPs
     Negative impacts on  wetlands
     Create   more  wetlands   through  new
     techniques
Ideal Future

  •  Government with common sense (17 dots:
     5  agriculture, 4  government, 3 citizen, 2
     academia,   2  public   interest  group,  1
     recreation and tourism)
  •  Development prohibited  along shorelines
     and wetlands (9 dots:  5 government, 3
     public interest group,  1 agriculture)
  •  Effective  public/private   partnership  to
     maintain productive and environmentally
     compatible  farming  (7 dots:   3 public
     interest group, 2 government, 1  business
     and industry,  1 citizen)
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                     Page 43

-------
    Inclusion  of  agricultural  community  in
    watershed planning (7 dots: 5 government,
    2 public interest group)
    More open space, less density around inland
    bays (6 dots:   2 public interest group,  1
    agriculture,  1  government, 1 academia,  1
    citizen)
    Leave wetlands alone and protect forest (6
    dots:  4 government, 1 fisheries, 1 citizen)
    Grocery stores  agreeing to  sell locally
    grown products (6 dots: 4 government,  2
    public  interest)
    Forest buffers on all streams and shoreline
    (4 dots:   3  government, 1 public interest
    group)
    Development of more organically growing
    farms (4 dots: 2 government, 1 fisheries, 1
    academia)
    "Better" chicken (4 dots: 3 agriculture,  1
    government)
    Prosperous and environmentally friendly
    Farms  increase   productivity   through
    technology using less damaging chemicals
    and  buffers to prevent runoff  (1  dot:
    recreation and tourism)
    Improve  balance  between farming and
    development (2 dots: both agriculture)
    Extend high  profits for agriculture and
    forestry  while  enhancing environmental
    quality (2 dots:  both agriculture)
    No net loss of farm acreage,  increase in
    family  farms and  use  of best  available
    technology to reduce pollution
    Produce wetlands as a cash crop (2 dots:  1
    government, 1 public interest group)
    Realistic,  comprehensive land use planning
    fully   implemented   (2  dots:      both
    government)
    Less   supply-side  intervention  (1  dot:
    government)
    More vegetable farming, fewer chickens (2
    dots:  both citizen)
    People with attitudes of conserving rather
    than consuming (3 dots:  1 government, 1
    business and industry, 1 fisheries)
    Balance   between   development   and
    conservation (1 dot:  government)
    Fully-funded conservation reserve program
         Zoning to limit housing development for
         open  land  and parks  (2  dots:    both
         government)
         Technology of farming more in harmony
         with nature values
         Reforestation of large tracts of land (1 dot:
         government)
         Protection of prime agricultural land and
         directed growth (1  dot:   public interest
         group)
         End of the  plague of greed (2 dots:  both
         public interest group)
Page 44
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
                       STATE OF MARYLAND REMARKS

                                    Verna Harrison
                    Maryland Department of Natural Resources
   Verna Harrison is an Assistant Secretary at
 the Maryland Department of Natural Resources,
 and is responsible for the Chesapeake Bay and
 watershed programs.

   Good morning. Very briefly I would just like
 to say on behalf of the Maryland Department of
 Natural Resources and Governor Glendening and
 the members of his Cabinet, that the Governor is
 strongly  committed  to  the   preservation,
 protection, and restoration of the  coastal bays.
 We  want  to  assure you  of our support in
 working with  the very many partners that  are
 here in making this a reality.

   One of the things that struck me last night as
 I listened  to the speaker from  the President's
 Council on  Sustainable  Development was that
 the Council members noted a couple of things
 associated with successful actions.  These are
 among the lessons that we have learned from the
 Chesapeake Bay restoration program.  And they
 are obviously embodied in what we  are seeing
 today in  that  people are gathered  here  to
 cooperate  and collaborate, and in the process,
 listen.  It  is a long road, but  with the kind of
 enthusiasm and energy that we have seen, it can
 absolutely  happen.
   Yesterday we gave thought to what the future
might hold, and this morning we are going to
hear about science and  assessment  —  the
findings of today.  My purpose in speaking to
you is to commit Maryland's full support to
work with  Delaware and Virginia, the various
federal  partners,   our  very  important  local
government partners,  citizen  interests,   and
Congress,  towards  the   development   and
implementation  of actions that can  make  our
visions a reality.  So I want to commend you for
taking your time on a Friday and Saturday to
work together.  Thank you.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                   Page 45

-------
            ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OF THE DELMARVA
                  COASTAL BAYS AND THEIR WETLANDS

                                Dr. Frederick. Kutz
                                   EPA Region III
  Dr. Rick Kutz received a Ph.D. from Purdue
University with  a concentration  in  Medical
Entymology, Physiology, and Ecology.  Dr. Kutz
has worked for  EPA  for  the past 20  years,
including 12 years -with the Office of Prevention,
Pesticides and  Toxic  Substances  -where  he
worked on  studies  involving  environmental
epidemiology and human exposure to pesticides
and other toxic substances.  He joined  EPA's
Office  of Research and Development  in 1985,
and is currently a Regional Scientist for  EPA's
Region III,

Slide No. 1 - Title and Cooperators

   •  Good morning! I  am pleased to be here.

   *  The objective of my presentation today is
     to share with you some findings about the
     condition of the  Delaware and Maryland
     coastal bays.   In order to gain a more
     detailed understanding of our study, you are
     invited to see the  exhibit on display here at
     the  conference.   If you  are particularly
     interested in  the entire  scientific  report,
     please leave your name and address, and a
     copy  will  be sent to you  when it is
     available in a few months.  A  two-page
     summary is provided at the exhibit booth.

   • This study  was designed to provide  a
     "report  card"  on  the  condition  of  the
     coastal bays. It was intended as a snap shot
     to characterize the major problems.
      •  We  found a wealth of new  information
         about the bays and also confirmed  on a
         system-wide  basis  some  older  existing
         findings.   On behalf of the Delmarva
         Coastal  Bays  Assessment  Group  who
         planned and implemented the study,  I am
         pleased to briefly describe our findings.

      •  This was a truly cooperative effort among
         the State and Federal agencies listed here.
         All  phases  of the  study   -  planning,
         sampling  and examining  results  -  were
         accomplished  together over  about a four
         year period.

     Slide No. 2 - Picture of Benthic Sampler (Not
     Included)

       •  This study emphasized the condition  of the
         living resources of the coastal bays  —  the
         fish, the submerged aquatic plants and the
         bottom-dwelling  organisms.   This slide
         shows the  scientific  equipment (Young-
         modified  Van Veen  sampler)  used  to
         sample bottom-dwelling organisms. As you
         will note, it's not as  simple as reaching
         down to the bottom and grabbing a handful
         of muck.

       • All of  these living  creatures  represent
         crucial elements of a healthy bay. We also
         measured  other  important  parameters  -
         water quality, chemical contaminants in the
         bottom sediment.  We studied most of the
         important stresses affecting the bays.
 Page 46
OELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
 Slide No. 3 - Significant Findings

    •  This slide  summarizes the major scientific
      findings of the study.

    •  Major portions of the coastal bays were
      found to  have  degraded  environmental
      conditions  due largely to excessive nutrients
      from  human   activities.  Twenty-eight
      percent of the area in the coastal bays had
      degraded communities  of bottom-dwelling
      organisms  (worms, insects  and  clams).
      These   bottom-dwelling  or   benthic
      communities are important because they
      represent a critical level in the food chain,
      serving as  food to many types of fish and
      crabs. They also serve as good indicators
      of water quality.

      -  Within the coastal bays,  Chincoteague
        Bay at the southern boundary was in the
        best   condition  of  the   four   major
        subsystems,  while Indian River at the
        northern part was in the worst.  This
        seems to form  a gradient  of the best
       condition in  the South and the worst in
       the  north.    Only 11% of the  area in
       Chincoteague   Bay   had    degraded
       communities of bottom-dwelling worms
       and insects compared to 77% in Indian
       River.  Less than 10% of  the  area in
       Indian River was suitable for the  growth
       of submerged aquatic vegetation  (SAV).
       In comparison, almost 45% of the area
       in  Chincoteague  Bay  was  shown  to
       support SAV. In fact, the most abundant
       growth of SAV is found in Chincoteague
       Bay.

     - Tidal  streams (tributaries to  the  bay)
       were in poorer condition than the main
       bodies of the coastal bays.

   • Eutrophication  (nutrient  enrichment)
     threatens   recolonization  of  submerged
     aquatic vegetation.   More than  75% of the
     area in the coastal bays was found to have
     water quality  unsuitable for the growth of
   SAV.  Vegetation beneath the  surface of
   the  water  provides  crucial  habitat  for
   spawning and development of fish, crabs
   and other estuarine animals.  This hostile
   habitat for  SAV  is  caused  by  elevated
   nutrient levels which stimulate algal blooms
   and decrease water clarity, thus reducing
   light required for the growth of submerged
   plants.

 • Traces of   pesticides  and   other  toxic
   compounds  were  detected,  probably  a
   remnant of historic inputs. Most frequently
   detected pesticides were DDT, dieldrin  and
   chlordane; most frequently  detected other
   toxic compounds were nickel and arsenic.

 • Man-made dead-end canals were profoundly
   degraded.  About  57% of their area  had
   dissolved oxygen concentrations less than
   state standards of 5 ppm.  Man-made, dead-
   end canals were  also  biologically barren,
   averaging only 4 bottom-dwelling (benthic)
   species per sample compared to 26 species
   per sample in the remaining portions of the
   coastal bays.  Traces of pesticides were also
   found more frequently  in these canals.

•  The scientific approach used in this  study
   allowed comparison of conditions in  the
   coastal bays  with  that  in other  major
   estuarine systems  in EPA Region III. The
   coastal bays were found to be in about  the
   same  condition as Chesapeake  Bay  or
   Delaware Bay with respect to water quality
   and    condition    of   bottom-dwelling
   communities.  Of course,  the actual size of
  the Chesapeake and Delaware  Bays  far
  exceed the area of  these  coastal  bays and
  must  be considered when making  these
  comparisons.    There  are  many   other
  differences as well.

• The  variety  and  abundance  of fish  in
  Maryland's coastal bays were found to have
  remained relatively  unchanged during the
  past  twenty  years,  while  that of  similar
  systems  in   Delaware   have  changed
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                  Page 47

-------
    substantially.  The kinds  of fish found in
    the Maryland coastal bays are dominated by
    Atlantic silversides, bay anchovy, Atlantic
    menhaden, and  spot, which is  similar to
    those measured in the Delaware coastal
    bays  35 years  ago.   The  fish fauna in
    Delaware's coastal bays today has shifted
    markedly toward killifish and sheepshead
    minnows   which  are  more  tolerant  to
    adverse  environmental   stress.    While
    silversides, anchovy, menhaden and spot
    have a broad range which includes both bay
    and   ocean  waters,  the  killifish   and
    sheepshead minnows have  a much more
    restricted  range and usually stay  within
    several hundred  feet  of their hatching
    ground. This means that the food chain has
    been   weakened because they  are  less
    available to predator birds and fish feeding
    on them.

Slide   No.  4  -  Potential  Management
Implications

  • A  number   of  potential   management
    implications  logically follow the results of
    this study.

  • Nutrients  appear  to  be  the  major stress
    affecting this system. The sources of these
    nutrients   need  to  be  identified,  and
    strategies  to reduce them  need  to be
    implemented.  Eutrophication is affecting
    the  plants and animals  so  important to
    restoring the health of these estuaries.

   • When  these  results are examined on a
     system-wide basis, it becomes apparent that
     relationships exists among  the bays in the
     three-state area.  For example, much of the
     stress associated with these bodies of water
     comes from non-point sources. Many of the
     non-point sources affecting  the northern
     part  of Maryland bays are actually  within
     the State of Delaware.   This is because
     some  of the  area which  drains  into
     Maryland  bays   fall  within   Delaware.
     Looking at a map, the State Line separating
         Maryland   from  Virginia  falls  across
         Chincoteague  Bay.      Obviously,   the
         movement  of  pollutants  across this  line
         would  be  unobstructed.    Therefore,  a
         Delmarva-wide  watershed  management
         approach is imperative.

       • Related to a Delmarva-wide approach to the
         management of  these  areas, we need to
         know what is happening in the  Virginia
         coastal bays.  A powerful advantage of the
         approach used to  examine the Delaware and
         Maryland  coastal  bays  is  having  the
         environmental  information to tell whether
         the actions that are taken are doing the
         right things in the right way. Therefore, a
         real   priority   in  this   Delmarva-wide
         approach is gathering similar data for the
         Virginia coastal bays.

       • The  construction of  additional dead-end
         canals needs careful study.  These canals
         are defined as being  at  least  200 feet  in
         length with engineered side walls.  These
         canals are for  practical purposes devoid of
         living organisms, and thus, contribute  little
         to the ecological health  of the bays  as  a
         whole.

       • Decisions to dredge new channels and to
         redredge  existing  ones  need  thorough
         consideration  because of the  unexpected
         detection of traces of pesticides and other
         toxic chemicals.  The actual operation of
         dredging exposes the  organisms living in
         the bay to  these chemicals.  With the data
         that we have now, it is difficult to predict
         whether  any kind of biological effect will
         occur. Additionally,  the bottom sediment
         removed during dredging operations  may
         need to be placed in areas where it will not
         drain back into the bays.

     Slide 6  - Summary  (picture  of bay - not
     included)

        • This study shows that major parts of the
          Delaware  and Maryland coastal bays are
 Page 48
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
      degraded  resulting   from  man-induced'
      stresses.  Plants and animals living in the
      bays are showing indications of decline and
      change.   Nutrients appear to  be the most
      important problem; however, other potential
      problems also have been detected.

      A frequently-asked  question of audiences
      after hearing this  presentation is "What
      happens if no changes are made?"  That is
      a difficult prediction to make. The stressful
      conditions that we found will certainly not
      change  without  our  intervention.    If
      nutrients  continue  to  increase  in these
      systems,  certainly  algal  problems  will
      become more prominent. Episodes' of algal
      blooms  and  other   related effects  will
      become more common.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                                                                    Page 49

-------
CO
CO
CO
^1^1
CO
CO
o
o
•o
C
JO
•L*
CO
SE
i
o
•••
CO

CO
o
o


c
0)
CO
0
CO
CO
^f

c
"6






*O
t:
UJ
s
42
2
o
•Q
jo
"5
O
^




ources and
CO
CD
cc
"s
3
+•<
CO
*©
Hh>«
C
CD
•*-*
V.
CO
o.
CD
Q
CD
CO
CO
CD
O




Q
*-i
c
o
o
"cc
«•••*
CD
E
c
0
•^
c
UJ
>i^ sf
"c
CD
c
o
c
UJ
0
HK"*
H—
o
*J
CD
4-1
CO
Q.
CD
O
•u
C
JO
^*
CO
^
15
ources
(0
CD
DC
"cc
15
to
*o
+-I
c
CD
•+-*
i_
CO
Q.
CD
O
T3
C
JS
i^,
CO
2E

sr
£m
+*~>
CO rf_i






C
_o
*rj\
\Jv
CD
cc

3_
D)
O
CO
3
to
UJ
<0
CO
DQ
"U
C
JO

o
1_
CO
CO
CD
O

r-
evelopmei
o
•o
c
CO
o
*T*
TO
CD
CD
QC
H—
O
CD
.a
3=
Q


Page 50
                                          DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------





























(/>

O)
"•5
c
LL
"c

LU
73
CD
73
CO
O)
CD
Q





CO
03
CD
ff\
C/}
CD
O
O
to
CD
DC
O)
_C
Z]
CO
c
CD
*-*
CO
CD
L.
JZ
c
o
"43
CO
0
Q.
O
+-•
13
LU
CO
^^J
^ '
c
0
£

0
C
'co
"co
u

£
0
o
o
'x
.2
0
O
T3
C
CO
CO
0
T3
jo
"43
CO
0
CL
'o
0
O
CO





^
^
0
0

"to
O
•=
0
4-1
0
CO
"co
CO
O
T3
C
LU
Gj ft \
Qm
^W*
1|
IS






L.
o

CO
m

0
CO
JO
0
O
CO
CO
T3
0
TJ
CO
D)
0
Q
CO
0 ^»
co^
cc"^
"co ®-
•4-J CO
CO CO
CO 0
O-C
oo


L.
Q^
^o ^>
2°
CO 73
Q- C3
0 >«
al

2.E
^^ Q^
CO m^m
"0"?
Q§
.E£
0 O
C£
3 .£2
J= ^
.2| .
C CO
— o 0
5 co "to
o££






















DELMARVA's Coastal
Bay Watersheds,
1996 Conference
Page 51

-------
            C
            o
•a
CD
CD
            03
            BO

            "EL
            S

            c
            o

            CD
            O)
            CO
            C
            03
                       CO
 CO °3
 co CD
 0
 O 4-1


II

S
      "S CO
       03 >»
       ^ CO
       C C
       §.2
       E^
       &a
       Q> i_
       gs
       £lS
a
             C
             CD
            HH*
             O
            a.
                     C ®
                     occ

                     •-5T3
                     03 r-
&£•

2S
MM Q^
LLJ32
         »*—
       •o o
       £  §
Qco
 o.o

 "§ "co
 ir ®
 QCL
Page 52
          DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
                       ECONOMIC STATUS OF FISHERIES
                                AND AQUACULTURE

                                     John Dunnigan
                           Atlantic States Marine Fisheries
                                       Commission
   John  Dunnigan  is the Executive Director of
 the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission,
 -which was formed over 50 years ago to improve
 inter-state cooperation  and coordination  to
 protect the public's interest in  coastal fishing
 resources. The Commission is best known for its
 inter-state fisheries management program, which
 coordinates regulatory planning among states
 with  coastal fisheries.   Prior  to joining  the
 Commission, Mr. Dunnigan had an extensive
 career   with   the  National   Oceanic   and
 Atmospheric Administration, and the National
 Marine Service, serving in a variety of legal and
 programmatic positions in the field  as well as
 headquarters.

   What  we do at  the Atlantic  States Marine
 Fisheries Commission is  something  that all of
 you will be focusing on over this period of study
 — find ways of bringing people together.  The
 Commission  recognizes  that  none of the  15
 coastal states can adequately protect their long-
 term interests  without  working together.   This
 whole  concept of  working together is  both
 critical and exciting, based on the Commission's
 experience of bringing   15 sovereign  states
 together   to  mutually  define  their  common
 interests  and then agreeing to move forward by
 taking steps that are hi everyone's best interests.

  At the outset,  I want  to  thank some  of the
people who helped  in  the development of this
presentation, particularly Dianne Stephan from
the staff of the Commission.   Dianne  is  the
 Director of our Habitat Program and did most of
 the legwork in putting this information together.
 I would also like to thank all of our resource
 specialists who  are listed  in the conference
 program.  In addition, I want to recognize Tim
 Goodyear from the National  Marine Fisheries
 Service,  Jeff Tinsman  from  the  State  of
 Delaware, and  Mark Homer  and Jim  Casey
 from  the Maryland Department  of Natural
 Resources.

   It is interesting that fisheries seem to always
 receive such a specific  focus.  The fact  that it
 gets highlighted is  a testament to the enduring
 and intrinsic values that we all place in fish and
 fisheries when we start to think of coastal  areas.
 Fisheries  are a good indicator; they are one of
 the ways that you know whether or not a good
job is being done in husbanding  the coastal
 environment.  It's one of the ways that we first
 see the results of what we are doing, or the pain
 of what we are not doing.

   The Delmarva Bays are a microcosm of a lot
of the issues  that play  out  up and  down the
Atlantic coast.  However, there are also certain
issues that tend to make this area unique and this
conference will probably want to focus on these.
This  presentation  will  cover  resources and
habitat, commercial and recreational fisheries,
aquaculture, and  conflicts.   The information,
however, will be very qualitative,  which should
provide a certain indication of the direction you
will want  to  take.  There is a lot of primary
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                                                                   Page 53

-------
information that is being collected, but we had
difficulty  finding a  lot  of  that  information
collated in  such a way that people who are
considering and  determining policy  can fully
utilize it.  There is a lot of work yet to be done
in this area of trying to provide some structure
to the information that is available about these
fisheries.    It is also important  to  note that
fisheries must be examined on a system-wide
basis, and not as a single issue, because they are
tied to many of the other economic and social
issues that are  attendant in these  Delmarva
coastal  bays.   We can't  even really look  at
individual  fish species, because the way that
they are prosecuted ties everything together.

   Commercial  fisheries  hi  this  area are
predominantly  small  family  operations, rela-
tively few hi number, and very much tied  to
being  able to respond  to whatever fish are
available at any given time.  These small vessel
operations are similar to those  found hi many
areas up and down the Atlantic Coast, and must
be  able  to  target  and  switch  their  catch
depending on the availability of the resources
from season to season and from year to year.
A wide variety  of species are caught, many  of
which are the same as those caught along other
areas of the coast.

   The economic values of these fisheries are not
well-documented.  Many of the statistics are
there,  but they  do  not  always  distinguish
between what happens  hi the  bays and what
happens in the  oceans.   In order to address
concerns over the coastal bays,  we have to  be
able to develop a system that will capture that
information for us.   But in general, the whole
panoply of species that are important along the
Atlantic Coast are important hi the Coastal Bays
 (e.g., flounder, weakfish, shad, striped bass,
 and many others).

    A much larger  fishery  hi  the  Delmarva
 Coastal Bays exists for the recreational fisheries.
 Currently, there are  both  good and bad signs
 concerning the state of this resource.  Some of
 the  species  that  the recreational  fishery  is
    dependent upon are doing fairly well right now,
    for, example, the success hi bringing back the
    striped bass resource along the Atlantic Coast.

     Some seem to be improving, such as summer
    flounder fishing, which was almost closed a few
    years ago,  and weakfish  fishing, which appears
    to be  beginning  a recovery according  to the
    most recent stock assessment.

       There are very few charter boats that operate
    hi this area.   The  fishery is dominated by
    private, individually-owned craft.  This creates
    interesting   opportunities   and    interesting
    problems.      The   opportunities   for,  local
    businesses and for tourism are closely linked.
    But  the opportunity creates problems when you
    have large  numbers of  tourist  recreational
    fishermen  who are only in the area for short
    periods of time. They are a diverse community
    and  it is extremely difficult to get in touch with
    them concerning the status of the resources and
    good fishing practices. They are also very hard
    to sample  to determine  impacts on the fishery
    resources.   The  major recreational fisheries
    sampling mechanism along the Atlantic Coast is
    the  National  Marine Fisheries Services and
    Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey,
    which is not designed to yield information and
    data on a scale that is relevant to inland bays or
    even on a state level. This survey was designed
     15  years  ago   to  provide  broad   coastal
     information.  In a number of instances, states,
     including Maryland, have tried to  supplement
     this survey data.  But often there are not enough
     resources  to  capture all of the  data  that is
     needed.

       Aquaculture is,  perhaps,  a large  area  of
     opportunity still to be  explored  in the inland
     coastal bays.  There are operations underway in
     Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia for clams and
     scallops. Governments  have riot yet figured out
     how to respond completely to this opportunity of
     using coastal  waters for aquaculture.   This  is
     true all along the  Atlantic Coast.  There are a
     number of businessmen who have tried to make
    /investments hi aquaculture for some species that
 Page 54
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
 we have been aware of for some time (e.g.,
 rock  fish),  as well as others  (e.g.,  summer
 flounder).   Governments  have not yet learned
 how to deal effectively and efficiently with these
 businesses, resulting in complaints regarding the
 labyrinth of regulations and procedures at all
 levels of government.  The situation is further
 complicated by technologies that are still under
 development and businessmen that are trying to
 break  into  traditional  markets.   Therefore,
 aquaculture   has  to  undergo  much  more
 development  before it  is  a  major  factor
 influencing the fisheries in the area.

   The Delmarva Inland Bays are distinguished
 from other regional and sub-regional fisheries by
 the small size of the area, both in terms of miles
 and the size of the watershed.   In addition to
 being a relatively contained area, barrier islands
 make   this   a  very   fragile   environment.
 Development has consumed much of the buffer
 zones.     Nonpoint  source   pollution   and
 stormwater  management   still  need   to  be
 addressed,  and public education needs  to be
 increased.   A  small  area also  means less
 diversity  and therefore less  buffering between
 different  interests.   However,  a small  area
 facilitates   bringing  people    together  and
 identifying what their interests are, resulting in
 more participative  decision-making and more
 locally-controlled public policy decisions.

   Let me close with the following conclusions:

   1)   There is a lot of work that needs to be
       done in terms of studying what is going
       on in these  fisheries.   Much  primary
       information has been collected but has
       not been collated in a  format that is
       useable  for  public  policy  decision-
       making.

   2)   Find  ways   to  capture  non-scientific
       information.    By  the  time  scientific
       information is collected,  analyzed and
       made usable, it is somewhat dated. The
       small   size   of  this    area   creates
       opportunities   to   collect   real-time
     information and  make  it  useable  to
     public policy decision-makers.

3)   Focus on education.  There is a great
     opportunity here   to   raise  people's
     consciousness  concerning  the critical
     nexus between habitat,  fisheries, and
     economics.

4)   Working together can  break down the
     barriers of communication and overcome
     the  rhetoric that  clouds public policy
     decision-making  and   fisheries
     conservation and management decision-
     making.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                                                                     Page 55

-------
                      DELMARVA'S TOURISM INDUSTRY

                                    Lisa Challenger
                             Worcester County Tourism
  Lisa Challenger is a graduate of Perm State
University and moved to Worcester County  in
1987. She worked in the hospitality industry in
Ocean City before taking her current position as
Tourism  Coordinator for Worcester County six
years ago.  Ms. Challenger serves on the Board
of  the  Maryland  Downtown  Development
Association and  the  Lower  Eastern  Shore
Heritage Commission, and is a member of the
Maryland Tourism Council.

I. Past Tourism Trends

   1.   Beaches, beaches, beaches
  2.   Long vacations

II.   Present Tourism  Trends

   1.   Heritage Tourism
       Educational oriented experiences
       (Visitation to historic sites, trails, parks
       with an emphasis on interpretation)

   2.   Eco Tourism
       Comprising   10-20%   of  all  travel;
       birdwatching,  nature cruises, hiking &
       canoeing, cycling, etc.

   3.   Conservation and outdoor recreation as
       tools for economic development

        • Tourism can justify conservation and
          subsidize conservation efforts. This is
          because  an  environment of  scenic
          beauty   &   interesting   features,
     III.
  vegetation,  wildlife,  clean  air  and
  water offers many  of the  resources
  that attract tourists

Statistics:

  40.4%   walk for health
  32.8%   pursue physical
          fitness/exercise
  14.9%   bicycle
  13.75%  boat or sail
  12.4%   run or jog

  9.2  million people are involved  in
  wildlife   related  recreation,   71%
  pursued wildlife  viewing

  $13/day spent by typical birdwatcher
  $22-$60/day spent by cyclists

   Over 1,000 rail-trails in U.S. today

Pressing  Issues  Facing  Tourism  on
Delmarva

 1. Balance  of built  environment  vs
   natural environment

2. Jobs - High unemployment rate  in
   Worcester County and a higher than
   national average across Delmarva
 Page 56
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
  IV.     What's Being Done Today

         1. Forming partnerships with local, state
           and federal government

         2. Forming grass roots organizations to
           address our individual needs/concerns,
           with particular attention to land use
           issues. Organizations include:

           Lower Shore Land Trust
           Eastern Shore Land Conservancy
           Lower Eastern Shore Heritage
            Committee
           Pocomoke River Alliance
           Nanticoke River Alliance

        3. The visions of the 1992 Planning Act
           which  have  been  or  are  being
           incorporated   into   local   plans
           throughout the state:
           a.
          b.
          c.
          d.
Development is concentrated in
suitable areas
Sensitive areas are protected
In rural areas, growth is directed
to  existing  population  centers
and resource areas are protected
Stewardship  of the  Chesapeake
Bay and the land is a universal
ethic
Conservation   of   resources,
including a reduction in resource
consumption, is practiced
       4. GIS Mapping Project

          A visual  illustration  of correlations
          between resources and resource uses

Source:

Statistics  -  Rivers,  Trails  &  Conservation
Assistance Program of the National Park Service
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                                                                     Page 57

-------
                        AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY

                                   John Tarburton
                       Delaware Department  of Agriculture
   John Tarburton was appointed Delaware's
Secretary of Agriculture in 1993.  He graduated
from the Virginia Polytechnic Institute -with a
Bachelor's degree in Agronomy. For the last 23
years, he has owned and operated a 315-acre
potato  and grain farm.   His involvement  in
agricultural policy began well before his current
position. He served for eight years as President
of the Delaware Farm  Bureau, and also served
as President of the Delaware Association  of
Conservation Districts and Chairman of the
County Conservation District. He was a member
of the Delaware  and Maryland Governor's
Wetlands Roundtable and Co-Chairman of the
Water  Committee   of  the  Governor's
Environmental Legacy  Commission.

    Before I get started, I want to give you a few
"teasers."  We have not talked much about the
Delaware Center for the Inland Bays, which is a
model of  how  to  get something done.   The
 Center is a child of 10  years of work concerning
the problems of the inland bays in Delaware.
The process takes several years; the development
 of  the  Comprehensive   Conservation  and
 Management Plan  (CCMP)  almost  got into
 trouble after five years, but was saved by strong
 leadership   and   the  involvement  of   other
 interested groups that did not feel they had been
 part of the planning process.  It is important to
 involve all  stakeholders  at the outset.   The
 process of  consensus-building  means leaving
 your  agenda at home and understanding, not
 necessarily accepting,  other points of view.
       Delaware also has the Governor's planning
    committee. I am convinced that most people are
    enthused about geographic information systems
    (GIS), but do  not necessarily understands what
    the acronym stands for, and even less know what
    it can do. We are at the point where we have
    overlaid 17 GIS maps together, 10 of which are
    priorities and the rest are ancillary. The State of
    Delaware can  no longer put water lines, sewer
    lines, schools,  and roads in "west Podunk."  We
    just  don't have  the cash.   As we overlay the
    population distribution with the school districts
    and infrastructure, the old geometry formula for
    the circumference of a  circle (radius squared)
    shows that it  will cost  significant amounts of
    money to incrementally extend services to the
    next  area. This is what is driving planning in
    the State  of Delaware.

       Now on to  my topic.  The best place to begin
    is with some  education  and discuss agriculture
    on a generation basis; what was it like when
    your parents were the decision makers and what
    is it like now? In 1975,  there were 3,700 farms;
    in 1995,  there are 2,500 farms.  I am not sure
    whether this is good or bad.  Always question
    the  statistics;  don't  make  a  snap judgment.
    Average  acreage in 1975 was  186; today the
     average  is 228 (a +22.5% change).  Delaware
     has a total of roughly 1.2 million  acres; in 1975,
     about 690,000 acres were productive (in field or
     vegetable crops) and in 1995,  about 570,000
     acres were in  production (a -17% change).  As
     expected, however, the value  of the operating
     unit  has gone  up.  In 1975, the value was about
     $181,000  (including   infrastructure  and
 Page 58
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
 equipment);  today,  it's  $581,000  (a  +221%
 change).  This far exceeds the Consumer Price
 Index. A key point is that agriculture is a highly
 capital intensive business and is not capable of
 accommodating snap  decisions (e.g., planters
 cost $60,000).

    The value of the poultry industry alone along
 the Delmarva Peninsula is $1.5 billion.  On top
 of this, poultry processing has one of the highest
 multiplier effects, not only in dollars but also in
 terms of labor (both  are over 5).  So when you
 consider regulations on various aspects of input
 for the poultry industry, keep in mind the ripple
 effect that occurs over the allied industries. This
 came home when there  was a threat to cut off all
 poultry imports into  Russia.  This was a $700
 million  threat,  which  would have resulted in
 dumping  on  the  domestic  market   to  the
 detriment of the beef and pork industries, and, in
 general, have had a severe impact on the entire
 corn-soybean-meat complex.

   Forestry acreage has increased  in Delaware
 since 1909, from 330,000 acres to 376,000 acres
 today (these are acres that are actively farmed).
 231,000 of those acres are in Sussex County and
 81 percent are privately owned.  The industry
 employs about 3,700 people and gross sales of
 products are evaluated at $97 million.  In terms
 of environmental impacts, the larger fields have
 pushed aside  smaller fields due to changes in
 equipment.    Lots  of  small  plots  have been
 abandoned.

   We have made several conversions; the State
 of Delaware  led the nation  for years  in  the
 percentage  of  acreage converted  to  no-till.
 While this reduces the erosion, more chemicals
 are used.  A lot of capital has also been used to
 put  in  water  retention  systems in dairy and
 poultry farms.  Because it costs $50,000 to  put
 in a waste lagoon on a dairy farm, the State  has
 been   involved   in   cost  sharing  programs;
 similarly,  the  State  helps  share  the cost of
 manure sheds  for poultry farms. Again, good
 science may make us wonder, however, if this is
 good or bad.  I would suggest that  government
 be allowed to  experiment.  Manure  in a field
 develops a crust that may result in less nutrients
 in  run-off than previously  assumed.  Manure
 sheds, on the other hand, present a fire hazard
 due to spontaneous combustion.

    Farms  are  by far the  largest habitat  for
 wildlife.   I  think  many "green" groups now
 understand that whatever form agriculture takes,
 they would rather see land in  agriculture rather
 than 1 housing unit per  acre.  Subdivisions do
 not have wildlife.    Forestry is  a renewable
 resource and a great habitat  for quail.  The
 problem is that forestry has an image problem.
 Trees are only cut down  every 30-40 years, and
 it disturbs some people when  they see a forest
 being cut down. But I would suggest that some
 image building  is needed; maybe a few bus trips
to show people what the land will look like 3, 5,
or 7 years later.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                                                                     Page 59

-------
                      QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION

                                      Facilitator:
                                   Gwynne Schultz
                  Director, Coastal Zone Management Division,
                  Maryland Department of Natural Resources
Introduction

   Following  the  panel  discussion  on  the
environmental and economic status of the coastal
bays   and   their   watersheds,   conference
participants  were provided with a 15-minute
break in which to develop questions for any of
the panelists  or resource  experts.   For the
remainder of the hour, the panelists and resource
experts addressed several questions, which are
presented  below.   Due to the overwhelming
number of questions and limited time, however,
the majority could not be discussed. Appendix
C lists these other questions  that remain for
future discussion.
Question 1.
dead?
Why are the dead end canals so
Response:  Dead end canals go against natural
forces in estuary systems — estuaries are wider
and deeper at the mouth, while dead end canals
are uniformly deep (or deeper inside the canal
than at the  mouth) and do not become wider.
Therefore, dead end canals do not have flushing
and have a  dead zone.  Also, because these
canals  are   engineered, they  have  a  linear
shoreline.   In addition, land uses that  cause
problems (e.g., contaminated ground water and
runoff) are  in much  closer proximity  to  the
canal.
Question 2. How can we incorporate the effects
on fishery  resources into  the decision-making
process for human activities on land? Apply this
to small permitting  decisions and local  and
regional land planning.

Response:  Some of the laws currently focus on
fishing  activities.  Other  activities,  however,
affect fisheries health. This is a basic structural
problem.  The best action available now is to
provide information to citizens and public policy
makers  concerning land use and water quality.
We   also   need   to  coordinate   fisheries
management   decisions  made  by  different
agencies (e.g., land use and water-quality).

Question 3. What is the definition of a tourist?
The main negative impacts on DE inland bays
are from what we call "summer people" who
come for two months and then either go home or
to Florida to avoid paying DE income tax.  They
do not attend environmental conferences so how
do you  reach them?

Response:  A tourist is someone who drives here
 and spends any amount of time and money. One
 action is to try to market certain types of tourists
 who will appreciate the resources this area has.
 How to reach tourists is a  challenge to all of us
 here, and any input is appreciated.
 Page 60
                             DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
  Question 4. If farmers were in a room together
  to discuss where they would like farming to go,
  what would their vision be (more intensive or
  incentives  for  preserving   wildlife   and
  biodiversity)?

  Response:   Tax  law is probably  the  single
  biggest tool that changes small business.  The
  1985 law in particular, caused radical changes by
  removing the  investment tax credit and taking
  away the opportunity  for private enterprise to
  participate   in  passive   losses.    Regarding
  production and environmental  issues, there is a
  fair  amount  of agreement; farmers  are the
  foremost  stewards  of the soil  and  are  as
  concerned  about the environment as  anyone.
 Farmers  also work primarily by example; e.g.,
 what is successful for neighbors, the Cooperative
 Extension, and the USDA. In general, voluntary
 measures  will  be much  more  effective  than
 regulation.  Finally, if an action is economically
 profitable, farmers will ultimately take it (some
 time may be required to change equipment).

 Question  5.    Is it feasible   to  renew  the
 headwaters of our estuaries by recycling the
 soils into top soil?   Headwaters of the St.
 Martins River  were 25 ft. deep  and supported
 the lumber industry's barge and ships,  but are
 now 1.5 ft. deep and spreading out to the larger
 bays.

 Response:    Dredging  is very  expensive.
 Dredging also  raises concerns  about spreading
 historic contaminants  that have been found in the
 sediments.  Therefore it may be  better to leave
 the soils in place.

 Question  6.  As afield researcher, you have the
first access to primary data.  In your years of
 experience, how do you feel is the best way to •
 collate  this primary  information into a  "real
 time" useable tool for policy members?

 Response: The data is being used right now as
 part of a process to comment on 15 management
 plans for different species.  The data is also used
 for long-term monitoring.
 Question 7.  Could you speak more as to how,
 while  providing  appropriate  environmental
 protection and "sustainable development" to keep
 tourism in the  inland bays area affordable to
 most citizens?  Many places are already out of
 reach  to   lower income  brackets,  which is
 approximately 35%  of the population.   I am
 concerned that close to 2 of every 5 citizens can
 no longer afford to see and learn from heritage
 tourism and other valuable resources and thus
 many citizens do not  understand  the need or
 benefits of conservation and preservation. This
 is a big part of society out of this loop.

 Response:  Heritage tourism is not expensive.
 For example the Beach to Bay Indian Trail is a
 national recreation trail that stops at all of our
 museums and parks.  The museums do have a
 nominal fee most of the time, but other activities
 are free.  Also,  the National Park Service is in
 the process of developing models for sustainable,
 affordable  ecotourism in  St. John.  While the
 process will take several years, the findings can
 be transferred to bay localities.

 Question 8.  Agriculture is our most important
 industry on the  Peninsula.  It is also a major
 source of water  contamination.  With the sandy
 soils over much of the Peninsula, some degree of
 ground-water contamination from fertilizers and
 manures is unavoidable. How much more than
 what we have done (or are doing presently) with
 best  management practices (BMPs)  can  we
 expect to improve this situation?

 Response:    Agricultural   improvements   are
 continuous.  For example,  in Sussex County, the
 "We Care" program brought poultry  farmers and
 environmental  representatives   together,   and
 Delaware was  among the  first to  calibrate
 manure spreaders in  the 1970's.  However, as
 noted in the question, contamination is not only
 limited  to  nonpoint  sources, but also ground
 water, and improvements take a long time to see.
Nitrate has  begun to  level  off (shallow  flow
paths  have been determined to be approximately
 10 years long), but it would take several years to
measure  improvements if all  activities   were
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                                                                    Page 61

-------
stopped  today.    Ongoing  activities  include
research into manure spreaders,  assigning one
nutrient manager per county in Maryland, and
implementation  of BMPs  on a lot  of land.
Manure  use is  likely to  increase  (e.g.,  on
vegetable crops) because it is less expensive than
other fertilizers.   Generally,  there is a lot  of
awareness  in the  industry and incentive  to
protect ground water because farmers also use it
for drinking water.
  Page 62
                                            DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
          REGIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON COASTAL BAYS ISSUES

                                  W. Michael McCabe
                   Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region III
    The  previous  speakers talked about many
 different   values   —   social,   economic,
 environmental.  All of these contribute to the
 complexity of the issues we are trying to address
 concerning the Delaware Coastal Bays.   Their
 impact on the watershed is critically important.

    As we have heard today, we have a lot of
 important information on the conditions and
 impact of development on the bays.   What we
 need to do now is use this information to mold
 the  decisions  on the  future of this area.  We
 need to  construct  models  that are constructive
 and useful enough to allow policy-makers to use
 this information.  The assumption that  "if we
 build it,  the infrastructure will come," is no
 longer the case, and  this  presents us with an
 opportunity to develop information and to show
 that the end product of development does have
 consequences.  Some of these impacts can be
 alleviated  if we  plan properly  and manage
 growth in the proper way.

   Therefore, considerations for the future must
 incorporate all  of these  outlooks  — social,
 economic, and environmental.  Our  thinking
 must be  on a  Delaware Bays watershed level,
 not on a county- or state-specific level.  There
 is a role for all of us  in developing  the
 information  and   models.      EPA,   state
 government,  local government,  citizens  and
 business  all must be part of a process to help
 policy-makers gain some control over the future
 of growth in this area. Our approach must be
 consistent with the environmental information
 that  has  already been collected and is  under
 development. We need to use this information
 to determine whether the approach we take has
 the desired outcome.

    The   current   Environmental  Protection
 Agency  Administration   has  a  very  strong
 commitment and orientation towards community-
 based environmental protection.   This  area,
 Region III, has some of the strongest programs
 in the entire country.  The Chesapeake Bay
 Program is a model not only for the rest of the
 country, but for  the  world,  in how to  bring
 together a regional approach to address a major
 environmental resource  issue.    We haven't
 solved all the problems nor been able to always
 implement what  we  believe  to be  the  most
 effective and  efficient approach of managing
 growth, but we are certainly further along in
 understanding the issue and providing policy-
 makers with information to set objectives.  We
 are also working very closely with people hi the
 mid-Atlantic highlands in  Maryland and  West
 Virginia.  The approach there brought together
 all levels  of the  community  to help develop
 priorities for how they want to grow. For this
 project, EPA  provided technical  support and
 information for them  to use  hi charting  their
 future  for protecting the environment  and
 creating sustainable development.  The EPA is
 also  involved  hi the Delaware  and Maryland
 Estuary Programs  that  have  already   been
 discussed.     An   important  aspect  of   this
conference  is hopefully that we will be able to
coordinate  the resources that  are operating in
Delaware and Maryland already, and bring in
Virginia to  create a new synergy.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                                                                  Page 63

-------
   We  need to  leave  this  conference  with
several major commitments among ourselves:

   •  We  need  to form  a partnership  to
      characterize the Virginia coastal bays to
      understand them better and in a way that
      is  compatible  with   Delaware   and
      Maryland activities

   •  We need to work with officials from all
      three   states   and  the   interested
      stakeholders

   •  We need to draw  in  local government
      more directly  because they  need the
      information  and   incentive   to  move
      forward in a way that protects the area

   •  We  need to continually support the
      implementation of  recommendations in
      the Delaware Inland Bays Comprehensive
      Conservation and  Management  Plan
      (CCMP)

   •  We need to develop a solid CCMP for
      the Maryland coastal bays  that reflects all
      three states' support and participation.

   To summarize, it is a total regional effort,
 the model is as  nearby as the Chesapeake Bay,
 and we can draw on the many experiences and
 technical support available from EPA Region
 HI.  EPA is not the only actor;  the strength of
 EPA lies in our scientific  information, technical
 support, and by virtue  of  our position,  the
 ability  to  bring  together so many different
 people.  Hopefully, if we ever get a budget, we
 can free up financial resources  to further the
 development of a very  important project  and
 process that will determine the future of this
 incredibly sensitive natural area.
 Page 64
                                          DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
              NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM IN MARYLAND

                                    Gwynne Schultz
                  Director, Coastal Zone Management Division,
                   Maryland Department of Natural Resources
    Gwynne Schultz is Director of the Coastal
Zone Management Division  in  the Maryland
Department of Natural Resources.    She  is
currently serving as the Interim Chair of the
Management  Committee  for  the  Maryland
Coastal Bay Program.

    Last  July,  the Environmental  Protection
Agency accepted the Maryland coastal bays into
its National Estuary Program.  This is a national
program to encourage long-term planning and
management of nationally significant estuaries
that are  currently threatened   by  pollution,
development or overuse. The overall  goals of
the program are:

    1) Protection  and improvement of  water
      quality
    2) Enhancement of living resources

There are a total of 28 estuaries in the program
nationwide.

    Maryland's  "new program"  will build on
existing programs  - strengthen them and give
them more focus. We need to decide what will
come out of this planning process and your input
is essential. Success depends on realistic,  cost-
effective, equitable, and fair recommendations.
Therefore, we need all input.

    The  geographic scope of the area extends
from the Delaware state line to the Virginia state
line and includes  the coastal bays and  their
watersheds.
   The process we'll be following has four key
elements:

   1)  Establish management framework
   2)  Characterize estuary and define problems
   3)  Create   management   plan
       Comprehensive   Conservation    and
       Management Plan (CCMP)
   4)  Implement plan

   Key problems and issues identified in the
initial nomination package are:

   1)  Eutrophication
   2)  Loss of wetlands
   3)  Decline in finfish populations
   4)  Toxics contamination
   5)  Areas closed to shellfish harvesting
   6)  Water-based activities

   We have set up four committees to ensure all
constituents are able to participate:

   «  Policy Committee  - elected and appointed
      policymaking officials
   •  Management Committee - environmental
      managers from federal, state, and  local
      governments
   •  Scientific/Technical  Committee -  peer
      review/identify data gaps
   •  Citizen's Advisory Committee - provide
      input
   Some  of  the   key  activities   we'll
undertaking in the near future include:
be
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                    Page 65

-------
   1)  Developing public participation strategy
      (e.g., how to get tourists involved)
   2)  Developing   an   environmental
      characterization - look at all information,
      put in usable format, and identify gaps
   3)  Looking  at  all  existing  programs   -
      environmental regulations and education
   4)  Setting up a water  quality monitoring
      program and tracking BMPs.
Page 66
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
                DELAWARE CENTER FOR THE INLAND BAYS

                                  Dr. Bruce Richards
                                     Dr. Kent Price
                        Delaware Center for the Inland Bays
    Dr. Kent Price is the Chair of the Delaware
 Center for Inland Bays.  Dr. Bruce Richards is
 the new Executive Director for the Center. Prior
 to his new position, Dr. Richards worked for
 Penn State University in the Philadelphia area
 where he focused on training science teachers,
 small animal science, and invertebrate zoology.
 Previously, he spent two years as an agricultural
 teacher in  Lancaster County, PA.  He holds a
 Bachelor of Science degree in Animal Science
from the  University of Delaware,  and his
 Master's and Ph.D. are in Agricultural Science
 Education  and Administrative Studies.

 Overview

   The Delaware Center for the Inland Bays was
 established as a nonprofit organization in  1994
 under the Inland Bays Watershed Enhancement
 Act (Chapter 76 or Del. C. S7603). The mission
 of the Center for the Inland Bays is to oversee
 the  implementation  of  the  Inland   Bays
 Comprehensive Conservation and Management
 Plan and to facilitate a  long-term approach for
 the wise use  and enhancement  of the  inland
 bays' watershed by conducting public outreach
 and  education,  developing  and  implementing
 conservation projects, and establishing a long-
term process for the preservation  of the inland
 bays' watershed.
   The goals of the Center for the Inland Bays
are:
    1.  To  sponsor  and  support  educational
       activities,  restoration  efforts, and land
       acquisition  programs  that  lead  to  the
       present  and  future   preservation  and
       enhancement   of  the   inland   bays'
       watershed.
    2.  To  build,  maintain,   and  foster  the
       partnership among the general public; the
       private sector; and local, state, and federal
       governments,  which  is   essential  for
       establishing   and   sustaining   policy,
       programs,  and  the  political  will   to
       preserve and restore the resources of the
       inland bays' watershed.

    3.  To serve as a neutral forum where inland
       bays' watershed issues may be analyzed
       and considered  for  the  purposes   of
       providing responsible  officials and  the
       public with a basis for making informed
       decisions concerning the management of
       the  resources  of  the  inland   bays'
       watershed.

   The establishment  of the  Center was  the
culmination of more than 20 years of active
public  participation and  investigation into  the
decline of the inland bays and the remedies  for
the restoration and preservation of the watershed.
A key element of  this  progression was  the
publication of a Decisions for Delaware: Sea
Grant Looks at the Inland Bavs (1983) and  the
participation  by  Sea  Grant  researchers  and
outreach   personnel  in  the   problem-solving
process. The  last six years of this work were
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                    Page 67

-------
accomplished as part of the National Estuary
Program.

   The National Estuary Program, established
under the Clean Water Act and administered by
the U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency
(EPA), provided approximately  $2 million to
study the inland bays,  characterize  and set
priorities  for  addressing  the  environmental
problems  in  the watershed,  and develop  a
Comprehensive Conservation and Management
Plan (CCMP)  to protect and restore  the bays.
The underlying theme of the program is that a
collaborative, consensus-building effort involv-
ing citizens; private interests; organized groups;
and  federal, state, and  local  governments is
essential  to  the successful development  and
implementation  of  the  CCMP.  Recently
completed   through   a   highly  successful
participatory effort, the Inland Bays CCMP has
now been approved by Governor Thomas Carper
and the EPA.

Accomplishments: 2/1/94-1/31/96

   The Director of  the Delaware Sea Grant
Marine Advisory Service (MAS), Dr. Kent Price,
continues  to  serve as chair  of the  Delaware
Inland Bays Scientific and Technical Advisory
    Committee (STAC) and was also reelected chair
    of the legislatively-created Center for the Inland
    Bays. He also  serves  as  a member  of  the
    Advisory Committee for the Delaware/Maryland
    Coastal Bays Joint Assessment Program.

       Progress to  date has included filing  and
    obtaining non-profit  status  for the Center;
    requesting and  receiving a  one-time $50,000
    start-up  line from the state  of Delaware;
    assisting   in   the   proposal   preparation,
    submission, and acquiring  a grant  from the
    U.S.   EPA   for   $257,000   to  conduct
    demonstration projects relating to the Delaware
    Inland Bays Comprehensive Conservation and
    Management Plan (CCMP); presiding at the
    ceremony where Governor Thomas Carper and
    U.S.  EPA  Administrator  Carol  Browner
    ratified the CCMP; designing the recruitment
    strategy;  coordinating  the  hiring  of  an
    executive director for the Center, Dr. Bruce
    Richards;   establishing   basic    operating
    procedures  for  the   Center   through  the
    University and local vendors; and assisting in
    grants management for the Center,  including
    acquiring a $25,000  grant from the  Crystal
    Foundation to enhance the outreach capabilities
    of the Center.
                          CENTER FOR THE INLAND BAYS
                                  Organization Chart
                            BOARD OF DIRECTORS
       CITIZENS ADVISORY
            COMMITTEE
  SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL
     ADVISORY COMMITTEE
                    EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/STAFF OFFICE
               (Secretary, Volunteers, In-Kind Agency Staff (MOUs)
 Page 68
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
                            Board Members and Alternates
Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee:
Kent Price, Chair
James  Falk, Vice-Chair

Citizens Advisory Committee:
James  Alderman, Chair
Grace  Pierce-Beck, Vice-Chair

Department of Agriculture:
Jack Tarburton, Secretary
Ed Ralph, Alternate

Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control:
Christopher Tulou,  Secretary
Gerard Esposito, Alternate

Sussex Conservation District:
Greg McCabe, Representative
Eric Buehl, Alternate

Sussex County Association of Towns:
John Johnson, Representative
Matthew Falls, Alternate

Sussex County Council:
Robert Stickels, Administrator
Lawrence Lank, Alternate

Ex-Officio Members:
Danny Magee, Appointee of President Pro-Tempore of Delaware State Senate
Pat Campbell-White, Appointee of Speaker of Delaware State House of Representatives
Richard Pepino, Representative, Environmental Protection Agency
Charles App, Alternate, Environmental Protection Agency

Contact:
Bruce A. Richards,  Ph.D., Executive Director
Center for the Inland Bays
P.O. Box 297
Nassau, DE  19969
PH:   (302)  645-SEA5     Mobile:  (302) 670-2515
PH:   (302)  645-4243      E-mail:  brichard@udel.edu
FAX:  (302)  645-5765
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
Page 69

-------
       VIRGINIA'S REGIONAL APPROACH TO SUSTAINABILITY:
               BALANCING ENVIRONMENT AND ECONOMY

                                 Dr. R. Warren Flint
                            The Eastern Shore Institute
                                 Exmore, VA  23350
   Dr. Warren Flint is Executive Director of the
Eastern Shore Institute in Virginia.

What Is Sustainable Development?

   Communities  face  enormous   challenges
world-wide  as  their  social,  economic,  and
environmental  resources  are  depleted   and
destroyed. Sustainable development represents
a  way to  achieve  recovery,  improve public
health, and seek a better quality of life in these
communities  by limiting waste, minimizing
pollution, maximizing conservation,  promoting
cooperation and efficiency, and developing local
resources to revitalize the economy.  This is an
approach that the two counties on Virginia's
Eastern Shore (Accomack and Northampton) are
beginning to embrace with respect to revitalizing
their local economies while also protecting their
wealth of natural resources associated with the
coastal bay systems.

   Sustainable development recognizes that all
resources - human, natural, and economic - are
interrelated,  and  therefore  they   must   be
addressed in concert with  one another.   In
practicing  sustainable  development over  the
long-term one will:

    1) not diminish the quality of the present
      environment;
   2) not critically reduce  the availability of
      renewable resources;
        3) take into consideration the value of non-
          renewable resources to future generations;
          and
        4) not compromise the  ability  of  other
          species or future generations to meet their
          needs.

        The idea of sustainable development not only
     implies  wisdom  and stewardship  in  resource
     management for  the  future,  but also  includes
     equal fulfillment  in the present for basic human
     needs, such as food, shelter, clothing, health, and
     the economic means to achieve these.

        In practicing sustainability, one attempts  to
     balance economic development programs with
     environmental    quality.     This   can   be
     accomplished   through   both   ecological
     (environmental)    and    socio-economic
     (community)   assessments   that   take   into
     consideration and try to balance issues such as
     quantity  vs. quality, value  of non-renewable
     resources, efforts that meet societal needs,  extent
     of natural  habitats,  status  of  environmental
     degradation, and critical numbers of plants and
     animals to support functional ecosystems. If a
     balance is  not struck  among  many  of these
     economic-environmental characteristics than a
     region   can  be judged  as  potentially  acting
     unsustainable.

        An  equally important issue of sustainability
     is the  equitable  distribution of resources and
     benefits among  all sectors  of society.   If the
 Page 70
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
quality  of  life  for  the most disadvantaged
segment of  a community  is not  improved,
sustainability   will   not   happen.      Thus,
sustainability  also  translates  into  community
solidarity, equal access to resources, and equal
access to opportunities.   But  in dealing with
wide-spread poverty, often the perceived solution
is to grow economies.  Can we realistically grow
out of poverty? The  economy is build upon a
foundation of natural resources, human-made
capital,  and  human  resources.  All of these
elements  that support  rural  economies  are
extremely limited.   If we  want to grow our
economy to expand benefits, this growth will be
built upon a limited foundation, and sooner or
later the economy will falter. Alternatives to the
philosophy of uncontrolled economic growth are
strategies that (1) consider enhancing quality of
goods and services (development)  rather then
their  quantity   (growth)    and   (2)   the
transformation of economic flows of  capital,
materials, and human  resources.

Virginia Coastal Bays and  Sustainability

   Features which distinguish Virginia's Eastern
Shore, such as natural areas, landscapes, towns,
and local culture, are increasingly valuable assets
on a national and global scale,  luring increasing
numbers of  people  from  cities  for  outdoor
recreation and the experience of this  unique
region.  But change is occurring rapidly, as  it is
along the entire  Eastern Shore of  Delaware,
Maryland, and Virginia.  The health of the
estuaries,  bays and forests  has declined,  and
along with them the resources, livelihoods  and
social fabric upon which rural communities  and
local economies   depend.    Degradation  and
alteration of critical ecological  components and
processes have occurred due to the magnitude
and distribution of land uses in this region.

   Maintenance of the area's natural resources
and  social capital  is the  foundation  of,  and
essential to, a sustainable economy important far
beyond  the  boundaries of the Eastern Shore.
Thus,  focus  upon Virginia's Eastern  Shore
provides  the  opportunity   to   demonstrate
sustainable development as a world class model.
Many  people  are  seeking ways  to  manage
economic change and to retain and restore the
environments from which the region derives its
character and value.

   Changes  on  Virginia's   Eastern   Shore
landscape have  raised a  number  of issues of
concern for this  region that focus around:
agriculture
groundwater
transportation
environment
public services
affordable housing
land-use
regional governing
  approaches
aquaculture
treatment of wastes
recreation
tourism
economic development
education
forestry
historic and rural
  character
   The Virginia Coastal Resources Management
Program, a part of the Virginia Department of
Environmental  Quality, has devoted significant
energy  and  resources  to  assisting the  two
counties on the Eastern Shore, Accomack and
Northampton,  in  addressing  many  of  these
issues, especially  as they  relate  to  a  more
sustainable future for the region.  The Virginia
Coastal  Program   works   with  the   Marine
Resources Commission, Department of Game
and    Inland   Fisheries,   Department   of
Conservation and Recreation, and Department of
Health in Virginia to carry out its programs on
the Eastern Shore.

Cape  Charles Sustainable Park:  A World
Class Model

   An example of how the Eastern Shore of
Virginia and its local governments,  in this case
Northampton County, have begun to take charge
of their own destiny in moving towards a more
sustainable future is represented by the fine work
on the Cape Charles Sustainable Technologies
Industrial Park. A large number of stakeholders
came together and created a vision,  design, and
strategies  to  implement  the  creation  of an
industrial park that sits at the cutting edge of
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                     Page 71

-------
sustainability  with regards to  its connections
between economic development, environmental
protection and enhancement, and social ethics.

   The design of this sustainable, industrial park
has  been   the  result   of  work  by   local
governments,  state and  federal agencies,  non-
profit groups, businesses, and individual citizens.
The design principles and business approach for
the eventual park  embrace many characteristics
that are now considered important in achieving
sustainable communities,  such as:
self sufficiency
nature-based business
not what business
  does, how it does it
industrial  ecology
alternative energy
businesses sensitive to
  economic importance
  of natural resources
adequate tax base
family-wage jobs
environment a
  forethought
environmental design
local priorities met
equal access by all
  societal sectors
Coastal Bay Watersheds

   Tidal  wetlands  and coastal bay lagoons,
featuring  productive salt marshes and shallow
bay bottoms behind a chain of 18 barrier islands
stretching  60  miles,  dominate  the Atlantic
seaside coastal bay  area of Virginia's Eastern
Shore. This area of approximately  362 square
miles  of open water and emergent wetlands
provides habitat to fish and  wildlife, including
varieties   and  numbers  of bird  populations
unequaled on the Atlantic coast. These Virginia
coastal bays are a tide-dominated estuarine area
with  a complete  replacement  of water from
oceanic  flux  in  as little  as 2-3  days.  The
principal  land uses of the watersheds  in this
coastal region include agriculture, forestry, and
recreational tourism.   The  population  within
these watersheds  is approximately 47,000.

   As noted  above, through time  the  coastal
region   of  Virginia's   Eastern  Shore  has
experienced major changes.  These impacts are
compounded by the fact that watersheds in this
coastal region have a land to water surface ratio
that  approaches  1,  meaning  that  landscape
alterations have a more immediate impact on the
contiguous bay waters.  These alterations have
resulted in declines in water quality and certain
components of biological diversity which in turn
have caused the decline in health of Atlantic
coastal  bay  fisheries,  devastating  traditional
industries of fishing and shellfishing.

   Agriculture is important to Virginia's Eastern
Shore rural economy but  there  are  perceived
conflicts between its impacts on the environment
and  the traditional  seafood  and  aquaculture
industries.   Contaminant input to coastal bays
has been suggested as the agent responsible for
eutrophication in these mid-Atlantic  estuaries,
potentially affecting fisheries and habitats.  The
understanding of watershed function is important
in being able to predict the relationships among
agricultural practices,  aquatic-transport agents,
lagoon water quality, and associated  biological
responses.  An ecosystem approach is needed to
simulate the physical and biological balances that
sustain the ecology of these important coastal
bay  watersheds  in  relation  to their land-use
patterns.

   For example  in one Virginia  Eastern Shore
watershed  study,  results  to-date  illustrate  a
pattern of nitrate build-up in shallow agricultural
soil  layers  during  the   fall.    These  high
concentrations of soil nitrate shift from 15-30 cm
depth in November, to  45  cm depth by March,
and to 60  cm depth by April,  coinciding with
spring rains and associated leaching, suggesting
that there is significant residual of crop-applied
fertilizer nitrogen  occurring on this  watershed
from agriculture activities.  Groundwater quality
measured at selected wells also exhibits a pattern
of   nitrogen  enrichment   underlying   the
agricultural portions of the watershed.    For
example, total dissolved inorganic nitrogen in the
groundwater  coming  from  under agriculture
fields showed an average of 228.0 wmol/L while
these same measures in groundwater  derived
from areas of forest in the watershed showed an
average of 5  wmol/L.
Page 72
                   DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
    Stream   discharge   and   nutrient   flux
measurements in this watershed indicate quality
of the creek  surface  water  is  impacted  by
surrounding  land use  as dissolved inorganic
nitrogen increases during its  passage  through
agricultural dominated regions.  Creek dissolved
inorganic nitrogen fluxes show increases during
passage through the watershed several fold (up
to 10 times) greater than estimated fluxes based
on background nitrogen levels over the extent of
the creek.  Likewise, measures of nitrate and
chlorophyll collected in the  tidal creek and
adjacent  lagoon areas  are  indicative  of the
dynamic  nature  of the  groundwater flow  of
nutrients to the coastal lagoons, and impacts of
these nutrients on water quality. Nitrate is high
near  the  terrestrial  confluence (7 z/M/L) and
decreases readily (0.7 - 1.8 «M/L) as one moves
away from this influence and as the creek waters
are   further   diluted  with   tidal  seawater.
Chlorophyll levels ranged from 80-100  ug/L in
March 1994, during low tide (time of greatest
impact from groundwater), in contrast to only 40
ug/L  at high tide.  Chlorophyll levels decrease
drastically with  distance from  land,  further
emphasizing  the  potential impact of terrestrial
nitrogen.   These preliminary data suggest that
seaside watersheds can represent a constant but
widely variable nitrogen source to the coastal
bay systems.

Socio-economic Systems

   Other areas of focus in Virginia with regards
to  sustainable   land-use  and  coastal  bay
environmental quality, include the evaluation  of
social vitality  in this region and  how that  is
impacted by changing environments as well  as
serving as a source of impact to the quality  of
the coastal environment.  In recent years, as fish
stocks have dwindled and agricultural processing
has become regionalized closer to metropolitan
centers, the Virginia  Eastern Shore region has
suffered serious economic decline, resulting  in
the loss of  hundreds  of jobs.   These poor
economic  conditions have  resulted  in ripple
effects throughout this region's society in that
more  than 20% of the households live below the
poverty level as compared with  10.2% for the
State of Virginia as a whole.  Many households
(greater than 15%) do not even possess in-door
plumbing.

    The citizens of the region are hungry for new
business   opportunities   that  will  increase
economic development and jobs.  The challenge
will  be  to  balance  desires  for  economic
prosperity and improved social well-being with
continued maintenance of environmental quality
and important natural resources  in  the region.
Nature-based tourism is being promoted as an up
and coming business  opportunity  for Eastern
Shore communities.  It is important that we fully
evaluate the positive and negative impacts of this
potential industry to a region so dependent on its
natural  resources as  the  Eastern  Shore  is.
Economic  impact analyses performed  for three
years on the Eastern Shore Annual Birding
Festival have shown significant positive impact
to local  business over the three-day period of
this event.  The southern end of Northampton
County for example, has regularly experience  a
gross industrial output from this festival of more
than $60,000 since 1993  with  a peak in income
of $112,000 in 1994.

    In working towards a sustainable future for
Virginia's Eastern Shore, as stated previously, it
is also important to guarantee the social  well-
being of the different communities.   Part of this
social well-being relates  to the development of
affordable   housing   that  also  takes   into
consideration  the  preservation  of  natural
resources on  the shore.   Work is presently
underway to explore  possibilities  for linking
together   affordable  housing  concepts  with
sustainable, resource efficient  building designs.
The outcome of this work is expected to further
enhance  the affordability  of housing on the
Shore while also adding measures in residential
development designed to protect our limited
water supplies, shortage  of building materials,
and enhance the homeowner's energy savings.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                      Page 73

-------
Delmarva Regional Approach

   Implementation   of   sound   management
strategies  in coastal regions  like the Eastern
Shore   requires   the   coupling  of  coastal
environmental  quality  with  sound  land-use
decisions,  supported by  improved  scientific
knowledge.  The challenge is to design and carry
out  interdisciplinary programs  of  integrated
assessment,  focusing  on  the interactions of
external forces and associated responses in the
coastal  zone,  that  will more  soundly  guide
landscape  sustainable  development  in  these
regions. This  requires an "ecosystem approach"
to management and decisionmaking.   It  also
implies that there is often a direct linkage among
events that  happen respectively in  Delaware,
Maryland, or  Virginia and  the outcomes from
these events being realized in any other of these
states.   In other words,  the  different regions
(states)  of the Delmarva  Peninsula  are truly
interconnected.   Delaware  watersheds impact
Maryland coastal  bays.    Likewise,  Virginia
coastal bays, because of their significant oceanic
influence, affect the quality of Maryland bays.

   The Delmarva Peninsula represents a coastal
compartment.     This   coastal   compartment
exemplifies ageomorphologically and physically
Structured coastal unit repeated around the U.S.
and the world, and thus serves as an organizing
principle and a model to direct the comparative
assessment of the  many  forces acting on the
Delmarva Peninsula's coastal ecosystems. Using
this  organizing focus  and taking  a holistic
assessment approach can more effectively guide
development  of  the management  strategies
ultimately required to protect the  long-term
sustainability  of coastal resources in a regional
context.

The Eastern Shore Institute

   The Eastern Shore Institute (TESI) is a non-
profit organization founded in 1994 to address
sustainable development on Virginia's Eastern
Shore.    TESPs   mission is  to study  and
demonstrate ways for rural coastal communities
     to promote  economic  prosperity  and -social
     development through methods  that will also
     preserve and enhance their natural ecosystems.
     The  Institute carries out its mission related to
     environmental  integrity,  economic  viability,
     social  well-being, and  cultural  uniqueness  by
     pursuing two programmatic tracks: [1] linking
     land-use development with  conservation  and
     protection  of  economically  valuable  coastal
     watersheds  and  [2]  providing  assistance  in
     developing   rural,   sustainable  communities
     through grassroots empowerment, enhancement
     of local economies, and equitable improvement
     in quality of life.

        The Eastern Shore Institute has become a
     respected, independent organization sensitive and
     fully responsive to regional needs.  Because its
     constituency is all  sectors, of  Eastern Shore
     society, while serving no special interest group,
     the Institute can truly facilitate the application of
     objective and  sound information in  assisting
     others to meet their goals. It serves as a catalyst
     in assisting communities to improve human well-
     being without degrading environmental health.

     Measuring Success

        The next level of effectiveness for work in
     Virginia will include the development of tools
     for measuring  progress of projects, programs,
     and campaigns intended to advance sustainability
     in this region. The challenge in developing new
     and  different efforts  for improving the region's
     quality  of life  will  be to balance desires  for
     economic prosperity and improved social well-
     being    with   continued   maintenance   of
     environmental  quality  and important coastal
     resources.       Several   governmental-driven
     programs  and  projects, viewed  as   ways of
     improving economic conditions in a sustainable
     way for the region, are either being implemented
     or in the planning stages.  For example, in  the
     development   of the  Northampton   County
     Comprehensive Plan  citizens defined a desired
     future for the  County  and strategies  to reach
     their goals. The goals specified in the plan are
     to conserve the County's natural resources and
Page 74
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
rural  character, as well as to pursue economic
self-sufficiency for all citizens.  Citizen leaders
also  developed a Blue  Print for  Economic
Growth  which  further  articulates goals  and
development  strategies  that   preserve   and
capitalize on the County's natural and cultural
heritage. Accomack County has defined similar
goals  through  its   comprehensive  planning
process,  and  with Northampton  County,  has
cooperated  in the  Countryside  Stewardship
Exchange Program.

   At present there  is no way of determining
(measuring)  the  success  of these  various
programs and projects. In other words, how will
we know we are getting where we want to go, or
whether  we have arrived?  Benchmarks are the
indicators that tell us whether elements of a plan
are being achieved over time or if we are losing
ground.  An appropriately designed benchmark
program for measuring Eastern Shore progress
toward achieving sustainable goals will provide
this  region with  an excellent set of  coastal
management policy tools.  These tools will offer
managers new approaches for evaluating  the
effectiveness of current policies and management
strategies designed to link coastal resources with
economic development.  Positive  trends can be
highlighted, recognized, and actively maintained.
The   beginnings  of  negative  trends  can  be
detected   and  action  taken  to  ameliorate
problems.   A  benchmarks program will  also
promote  community  awareness about important
issues of sustainability and guide future policy
and decision making for the region regarding
development that is done in harmony with the
important natural resources of the area.

   With the assistance of The Eastern Shore
Institute, governments and public special interest
groups in this region of the Delmarva Peninsula
are  working   to   bridge the   gaps   among
environment,  economy,  and society in their
programs designed and  intended to improve
economic conditions within the region.  I hope
that I have been able to accurately present to you
some of the new and innovative approaches that
are being taken in Virginia and at the same time
demonstrated to  you how these approaches fall
within the realm  of a  region focusing  in  a
systematic   way   to   achieve    sustainable
development for its many diverse communities
that   emphasizes   simultaneous   focus  on
environment,  economy and social well-being.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                     Page 75

-------
     REPORT ON BREAKOUT GROUPS TO DISCUSS MODELS AND
     THEIR APPLICATIONS TO STATE AND LOCAL STRATEGIES
Introduction

   At  lunchtime on  the second  day of the
conference,  all  participants  were  directed to
select one of three breakout groups, Delaware,
Maryland,  or Virginia,  based on their own
interests.   For approximately  one hour, each
breakout group was directed to discuss the issues
and findings raised during the conference in the
context of  their particular  state  as well as
Delmarva-wide.    At  the  conclusion  of the
breakout sessions, the full conference reconvened
to discuss the findings of each group, which are
summarized  below.    Reports  focused  on
Delmarva-wide strategies, with the exception of
Maryland, which used the time to further discuss
the National Estuary Program (NEP).

Virginia

   The facilitator  for the  Virginia breakout
group was Dr. Warren Flint,  Executive Director
of the Eastern Shore Institute. Findings from the
breakout session were recorded on flip charts in
terms of issues and obstacles, and presented to
all conference participants.

   The first key finding is that, given all of the
activity in Delaware  and Maryland, Virginia
wants to be included.  Very little of the process
to date has crossed the state  line.  Models have
been developed, organizations are in place, and
state boundaries are artificial.  What Virginia
offers the process is serving as a model for what
the other bays would  like to achieve  in their
restoration efforts.  These bays are to a large
degree, with the exception of agricultural runoff,
     untouched by human activity.   Defining  what
     exists  is not  complete and  additional  good
     science needs to be undertaken to define what is
     achievable.   Also, while lack of coordination
     among local jurisdictions is another issued faced
     by Virginia, a planning district commission has
     been formed to address cross-county issues.

        Therefore, a mechanism is in place and needs
     to be activated with respect to coastal bay issues.

        Among  the areas where they would like to
     receive help are:

        •  Support from the State of Virginia for
           eastern shore issues — Unlike Maryland
           and Delaware,  the rest  of the State pays
           little  heed to  the eastern  shore.   No
           commissions  or coastal bay programs
           exist. The focus on the Chesapeake Bay
           is almost total.   Also, there is a lack of
           constituency/voting block.

        •  Development    of   an   overarching
           purpose/mission to bring the people of the
           eastern shore together — Virginia should
           immediately take advantage of the models
           offered  by Delaware and  Maryland to
           begin motivating people.

     Delaware

        Dr. Bruce Richards, Executive Director of the
     Delaware Center for Inland  Bays, facilitated the
     breakout session.  Findings were  presented on
     flip charts, beginning with  the key factors that
     contribute  to   tourism,    development,
Page 76
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
fisheries/shellfisheries/aquaculture,    and
agriculture.

   Factors that influence tourism include:

   •  No sales tax
   •  Two bridges with access
   •  Stock car races
   •  Birding/ecotourism  activities
   •  Coastal state parks
   «  Outlets
   •  Boating/jet skis

   Factors that influence development include:

   •  No sales tax, good economy, job base
   •  Infrastructure
   •  Proximity to water
   •  Profit/developer
   •  Quality of life
   •  Retirement area
   •  Clean beaches
   •  Recreational opportunities
   •  Pro-development atmosphere (politicians)
   •  Availability of housing
   •  Colleges and universities
   •  Public schools

   Factors that influence fisheries/
shellfisheries/aquaculture include:
      Lack of submerged  aquatic  vegetation
      (SAV)
      Political environment
      Water quality
      Nonpoint source pollution
      Loss of habitat
      Lack of education
      Agricultural impacts
      Neighboring jurisdictions (PA, MD, VA,
      NJ)
      Overharvesting
      Loss of wetlands
      Increase in technology
      Recreational  boating/jet skis
      Commercial development
      Benthic food systems
      Septic system impacts on habitat
   •  Shoreline stabilization
   •  Point source pollution
   •  Storm/waste water impacts
   •  Laws and regulations

   Factors that influence agriculture include:
      Jack Tarburton/Frank Perdue
      Russian exports
      Profit/costs/equipment
      Need to eat
      Commodity markets
      Weather
      Proximity to markets/infrastructure
      Consumer demand
      BMPs
      Land availability
      Uncontrolled development
      Laws and regulation
      Drainage/irrigation
      Availability of labor
      Urban encroachment
      Buffer zone/tax ditches
      Pest/weed control
      Technology
      Government subsidies
      Changing  demographics  (family  farm
      preservation)
   The  other key area  focused on by  the
breakout group was Delaware's connection to
Delmarva-wide  issues.    Issues  that  were
identified included:
      Over/underplanned uses of the landscape
      Population growth
      Changes in age/demographics
      Transportation
      Loss of habitat
      Water quality
      Quality of life
      Dredging Assawoman canal
      Rural/urban conflict
      "User" conflicts
      Natural disasters and planning
      Collective planning and education
      Increased cost for infrastructure
      Loss of federal funds
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                     Page 77

-------
   •  Political "will" regionally  (county and
      state)
   •  Loss of farmland
   •  Environmental data collection, use

   In summary,  key areas were  access and
infrastructure,    changing   demographics,
unplanned  growth, coordination at all levels of
government,   education   and   outreach,   and
regulations and laws.

Maryland

   The   facilitator  for  this  breakout  group,
Gwynne Schultz, Director of the Coastal  Zone
Management Division, Maryland Department of
Natural   Resources identified  four topics for
discussion:

1)  upcoming  activities;  2)  the  process; 3)
confirmation of the problems  and goals;  and,
time permitting, 4) Delmarva-wide strategies.

   Regarding National Estuary Program (NEP)
activities,  a  committee  structure  is  under
development.    The management committee
recently  met,  while  the remaining  committees
(policy,   scientific/technical,    and  citizen's
advisory) have yet to meet.  Candidates for the
Program Director's position  will be interviewed
this week.  Conference participants interested in
learning  more  about  the  program  and  its
committees should call Kathy Ellet at 410/974-
3382.

   Strategic   activities   underway    include
development of a public participation strategy to
reach all stakeholders,  development of a data
management strategy, preparation of a first-year
work plan,   and  signing  of a  partnership
agreement  among key players.   Other activities
include an environmental characterization study,
review of environmental programs, identification
of  priority   problems,   development   of  a
monitoring  program, and  preparation  of  a
management plan.
        The  following  comments/questions  were
     received concerning the NEP process (responses
     are noted where applicable):

     Comment:  Please elaborate on development of
     the public participation strategy.
     Response:  The Maryland NEP will review and
     evaluate strategies that were developed for the
     Chesapeake Bay Program and for other NEPs.
     A draft strategy will  be developed  based on
     these experiences.  We will look at what groups
     have been involved in past issues and determine
     which interests we need to  reach to make this
     new program a success.

     Comment:  Americorp requires goal-orientation,
     while we keep hearing about the process. There
     are numerous Americorp people on the eastern
     shore  who have  been  trained  in  databases,
     environmental assessment, etc.  Citizens need to
     know what is expected of them and what the
     goals will be.  We also need to develop a list of
     community groups with contact names that can
     help.
     Response:  Maryland has used the Conservation
     Corps in the  past  to  identify  problems.  In
     general, volunteer assistance is essential.

     Comment:  We need to make sure that different
     agencies do not have  barriers that exclude
     cooperation (e.g., years ago a bridge  was built
     that now restricts flushing, dredging actions may
     bring up contamination, and barrier islands were
     created that are now preserved). Different issues
     will require agencies to work synergistically.
     Response:  The NEP will be looking at linkages
     over the next year.

     Comment:  What connection is there between the
     NEP and the Corps of Engineers?
     Response:   The  Corps  of  Engineers recently
     completed  a 1  1/2-year long study that used a
     holistic approach to examine  water  resources
     (e.g.,    navigation,   water    quality,   and
     infrastructure).   This study set the groundwork
     for the  NEP, which will  elaborate on it.
Page 78
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
Comment:  Is there a process for getting citizen
input?
Response:   The NEP will  have two focuses:
getting  input from all stakeholders and getting
information out to everyone.  Mechanisms are
under development.

Comment:   Instead of population  control,  we
should recognize that everyone is a "re-creation"
artist  and   capable  of  re-thinking  things.
Limiting creativity, in general,  is  a bad idea.
Also, why not try to develop other areas of the
state and bring the whole state into the process,
since all resources come from the same pot of
money?
Response:  This leads into the next part of the
discussion, priority problems.

   The  breakout/group   next   discussed   the
following priority  problems identified by  the
NEP:

   Eutrophication
   Habitat modification and loss
   Decline in living resources
   Toxic contamination
   Shellfish closures
   Water-based activities

   The  following  comments/questions  were
received  concerning  the   identification   of
problems:

Comment:     Flooding  and  standing  water
problems due to population  pressures should be
added. We need better stormwater management.
We also need to  consider land subsidence due to
ground-water withdrawal, as well as sea level
rise (the minimum estimates indicate that it will
affect this area).

Comment: Environmental education is one of the
most significant actions to take.

Comment:    We need to  start demonstration
projects on sustainable economic development.
Comment: None of the studies have shown a lot
of toxic  contamination.  Why is this problem
listed and not sedimentation (like eutrophication,
this  affects  drainage  patterns)?   [Note:    a
resource  expert responded that toxics are listed
because  of findings pertaining  to historical
practices  and  implications   for  dredging;
sedimentation is a valid  issue and should be
covered as a separate problem or as a subset of
another.]

Comment: Fishing is very poor in the back bays
and the flounder are gone. Clam dredges flatten
out the floor of the bay and create large flows of
material.   In addition,  a speed limit should be
established for all vessels to control wakes.  The
MD DNR says concerns are an over-reaction, but
the commenter has seen these changes over a 45-
year period.

   The final discussion focused on the four main
goals for the MD NEP that were identified in the
original submittal package:

   •  Reduce water  and habitat quality impacts
      where they are most severe and maintain
      quality of areas not degraded

   •  Protect existing high-quality habitat,  and
      where possible, restore degraded habitat

   •  Control input of pathogens  and toxic
      chemicals for human health and recreation
      purposes

   •  Plan  for  sustainable development  and
      population growth.

   The  following   comments/questions were
received  on these goals (responses are noted
where applicable):

Comment: No one has recommended looking at
the Chesapeake Bay and what has been done
there.  Rumor says it has  improved.  We  also
have not heard  anyone  talking about  critical
areas.   Is there any movement to push  this
legislation?
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                     Page 79

-------
Response:  The MD NEP is not aware of any
legislation, but does have plans to look at the
Chesapeake Bay program.   Furthermore, EPA
noted that there are 28 NEPs in the country and
a technology transfer program exists to exchange
information.  There are several good examples,
beginning with the Delaware Inland Bays.

Comment:  Anything  that happens needs to go
through the Maryland State legislature; therefore,
we need to push for what we want.

Comment:   A lot  comes down to money and
development.  We are not going to be able to
keep people out. Ultimately, county, regulations
are most important and critical areas are a good
place to start. We need to figure out how to live
with these conditions.  For example,  we  may
want  to  consider  opening  up areas  that  are
restricted in exchange for controls on harmful
types of  development.   Also,  we  need to
communicate within groups (e.g., via a computer
bulletin board or e-mail).
Response:   Besides  regulatory programs,  we
need  to  look  at  offering  incentives  to  the
development community.  In addition, the MD
NEP has flyers available on becoming involved
with the Citizen's Advisory Committee.
Page 80
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
               FULL CONFERENCE DISCUSSION ON ISSUES
                 AND STRATEGIES BEST ADDRESSED BY A
                         DELMARVA-WIDE APPROACH
   Following reports  from the state breakout
groups, Rick Johnstone, Supervisor of Forestry
for Delmarva Power  and  Light,  opened the
discussion to all participants on Delmarva-wide
issues.   In  doing so, he noted that reduced
federal   funds   increase   opportunities   for
partnerships.   Specifically, his experience in
developing new Endangered Species Regulations
emphasized the  importance of involvement with
respect  to  non-regulatory  approaches.   To
elaborate on these approaches, Mr. Johnstone
showed a videotape that outlined the  voluntary
pesticide  environmental stewardship program
between the U.S. EPA and Delmarva Power and
Light, and  other  utilities.   The  videotape
provided an example of a partnership between
private  industry  and regulators  to  resolve
environmental   concerns   through   best
management practices  instead of regulations or
legislation.   These  approaches  constitute  a
paradigm shift, are economical,  and have proven
successful hi farming and the Chesapeake Bay.

   The following Delmarva-wide issues were
then identified by conference participants:

   •  The scientific and technical communities
      are very  aware  of what the problems are
      and some of the solutions, but the public
      at large needs to be educated.   A series
      of public service announcements in the
      tri-state  area needs  to be undertaken
      regarding the problems, programs,  and
      objectives.

   •  As revealed by the Chesapeake  Bay
      studies, the significance  of ah-  emissions
   needs to be taken into account, including
   auto emissions.

«  Do not underestimate the fondness of the
   American   public  for  some   of  the
   regulations   that  have  protected  and
   improved our environment far more than
   any  other   nation   hi  the  world.
   Environmental  regulations   are   not
   harmful and were  not developed  to be
   bothersome; they were developed because
   they are necessary.  People do not write
   unnecessary regulations.

•  Perhaps the bays should be federalized.
   The  states  will not get together  with
   enough clout,  and this  approach was
   successful for  the Grand Canyon.   It
   should  be used here because this resource
   feeds people.

•  Regarding how to reach the people who
   did not attend, every person here has the
   ability  to contact other people; everyone
   here  is a carrier  of the disease  called
   "bay-saving".  It doesn't matter if it's
   your Rotary Club, Kiwanis Club, Lion's
   Club,  sorority,   board  of  realtor's,
   farming organization,  or other  groups.
   Everyone has jobs that are dependent on
   the health of the economy hi this area.
   We cannot point fingers and expect others
   to act;  we have to do it.

•  The  structure of the conference will be
   kept together  for  a  while; i.e.,  the
   Agenda Planning  Committee will  meet
   again.  Your input is needed as to what
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                 Page 81

-------
      would be most helpful. Ideas can be sent
      to Marsha Ramsay, Rick Kutz, Warren
      Flint,  Rick Johnstone, Bruce Richards,
      Kent Price,  and others  if you are  not
      comfortable speaking in front of a large
      audience!    Also,  please  fill  out  the
      evaluation forms.

    •  Can the state representatives get together
      a few times per year to share information
      on what works and what doesn't work?

    •  There are many youth in the area that can
      get  involved;  e.g.,  Americorp  and
      Conservation Corps.   These people  are
      trained ha environmental assessments and
      environmental   restoration.      This
      involvement  will   improve   the
      environment,  provide hands-on training,
      and help these youth to be of service to
      their  community  and become worthy
      citizens of tomorrow.

    •  Everyone should  visit and  snorkel  in
      Virginia's  inland  bays  with  elected
      officials and citizens to see pristine bays
      and  develop  goals  for  Delaware  and
      Maryland.

    •  Lack  of  involvement by  the  biggest
      stakeholder,  Ocean City, is  a concern.
      We will  have a difficult time achieving
      goals without them.

    •  As  a   direct  consequence  of  this
      conference,    the   Worcester   County
      Planning   Department   has   received
      tentative  commitments  from the four
      other planning staffs to begin meeting on
      a regular basis.
Page 82
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
                           CONFERENCE FOLLOW UP

                                 W. Michael McCabe
                         Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA
   Marsha  Ramsay,  President  of Assateague
 Coastal  Trust (ACT), began the Follow  Up
 session  by  stating  ACT's  commitment  to
 advancing the work  of the  conference.  She
 expects ACT to facilitate communications among
 conference sponsors and participants, to build
 on this coalition to reach others,  to reach out to
 and educate all Delmarva stakeholders,  and to
facilitate involvement of local governments. She
 invited all  conference sponsors to work  with
 ACT.  ACT will seek public and private funding
 to carry out this commitment.  Ms. Ramsay then
 turned the podium over to Michael McCabe for
 closing remarks.

   I just want to thank everybody for coming,
 and  in particular, thank all of the members  of
 the  Planning  Committee,  especially  Marsha
 Ramsay and the people at the Assateague Coastal
 Trust.  When they first started talking about
 putting this conference together, I think  they
 were envisioning 60 or 70 people coming, and
 obviously  with  275  involved,  this has been
 beyond the planners' wildest expectations. This
 says great things about the level of involvement
 in this region.

   I  am not  about to provide  a  summary  or
 synthesis of what went on; I think everybody can
 take away different things from this conference.
 But I think it's pretty clear that we need to build
 on the success of this conference  in order  to
 accomplish some of the goals and objectives that
 have been set forth here.  I was really pleased to
 hear  that  the four  counties  will  be  getting
 together   and  that  the  agenda  committee  is
staying together. I think we ought to make this
conference an  annual  event  and EPA  would
certainly be willing to help if that is the desire
of the stakeholders.

   We  need  to reach out and  pull  in  more
people.  One  disappointment,  I think, with this
conference is  that  there  were   not   more
development  representatives.  These people are
having a tremendous impact on this area and we
need to bring  them in, talk to them, and educate
them.    We  also  need  to  involve  local
government;  I was  pleased to see the level of
local government participation but I think it can
be  better.    We  are  lucky  that  with  the
Chesapeake  Bay   Program  in  such   close
proximity,  we  can  have a lot of overlapping
benefits. One of the exciting new things in the
Chesapeake  Bay   Program   is   our   local
government initiative.  It's being put together
this year, including an action plan scheduled for
completion by this  October.  This  action plan
can be applied to several other communities as
well, including  the  coastal bays. As has been
discussed, EPA can tap into the community at
every level, and this  is what we need  to  do.
Everyday new people move into this community
because of the  quality  of life and they do  not
want to see that jeopardized. To the extent that
we  can  involve   these  new  residents  as
stakeholders,  they  will be a potent  force in
making sure that we have the kind of sustainable
future that we all care about and are looking for.

   If you are not involved, get involved with the
Delaware  and  Maryland  Estuary  Programs.
 DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                     Page 83

-------
Also, as discussed, Virginia has a number of
new initiatives  in the coastal area that need our
involvement  and a  broader stakeholder base.
With that kind of involvement, we can make
some changes.  To  my knowledge, there  has
been no natural  tidal wave that has hit  the
Delmarva Peninsula, but we are experiencing a
tidal wave approach to development in this part
of the country.  Unlike the natural phenomenon,
we can plan  for the impacts of the man-made
kind.  If we  don't, however, the destruction to
the quality of life and to the environment could
be no less severe, although a lot more prolonged.
We are looking for ways to deal with the impact
of that tidal  wave.   Your commitment  and
participation  indicates  that you care about how
we manage that, and I think that the future looks
hopeful.   I am glad  that I was part of  this
process, and I certainly plan on being a part of
future  events of this  kind, whether I am in a
politically  appointed  position or as a private
citizen.  Thank you and I look  forward to  the
next meeting of this group.
Page 84
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
                                     APPENDIX A
      DELMARVA COASTAL BAYS CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS
                   DELMARVA COASTAL BAYS CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS
                                         March 8,9,1996
   Robert Abele
   Ocean Pines
   4667 A Ocean Pines
   Berlin, MD  21811

   Raymond W. Alden III
   Old Dominion Univ./AMRL
   1034 W. 45th St.
   Norfolk, VA 23503-0456

   Edward Ambrogio *
   U.S. EPA Region III
   Mail Code 3EP10
   841 Chestnut Street
   Philadelphia, PA  19107

   Carol Anderson-Austra
   Corps of Engineers, Baltimore Dist.
   P.O. Box 1715
   Baltimore, MD 21203-1715

   Charles App
   US EPA Region III
   841 Chestnut Building
   Philadelphia, PA  19107

   Suzanne Aucella
   MD Dept. of Natural Resources
   Tawes State Office Bldg., E-2
   5 80 Taylor Ave.
   Annapolis, MD  21401

   Geraldine Bachman *
   Lower Eastern Shore Heritage Com.
   30485 Prince William St.
   Princess Anne, MD 21853
Billy Barroll
The Conservation Fund
1800 North Kent Street, Suite 1120
Arlington, VA 22209

Steven D. Beaston
USCG Sea Partners
19 Hassell Ave.
Bethany Beach, DE  19930

Gene A. Bechtel
1901 L street, N.W., Suite 250
Washington, DC 20036

Robert  Beckett
MD Dept. of Natural Resources
Tawes State Office Bldg., E-2
580 Taylor Ave.
Annapolis, MD 21401

Kim Beidler
JACA Corporation
550 Pinetown Rd.
Ft. Washington, PA  19034-2682

Geraldine Bell
Assateague Island Nat. Seashore
7206 National Seashore Lane
Berlin,  MD  21811

Jeri L. Berc
USDA Nat. Resources Cons. Serv.
339 Busch's Frontage Road
John Hanson Business Center
Annapolis, MD 21401
 * = Sponsors' Committee
 ** = Agenda Planning Committee
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                 Page 85

-------
  Paul F. Berge
  Accomack-Northampton Planning Dist.
  P.O. Box 417
  Accomac, VA  23301

  Elysabeth Bonar-Bouton
  MD Dept. of Natural Resources
  Tawes State Office Building. E-2
  580 Taylor Avenue
  Annapolis, MD  21401

  Jane Boraczek
  EA Engineering
  11019 McCormick Road
  Hunt Valley, MD 21031

  Donald E. Briggs
  National Park Service
  Conservation Assistance Program
  200 Chestnut Street, Suite 260
  Philadelphia, PA  19106

  Dave Bunting
  Dorchester Street Dock
  307 Dorchester Street
  Ocean City, MD 21842

  Randy Burgess
  Center for Marine Conservation
  306A Buckroe Avenue
  Hampton, VA   23664

  Mary Burton
  Sussex LWV
  R.D. 6, Box 98
  Millsboro.DE  19966

  Patrick Burton
  MD Dept. of Natural Resources
  Tawes State Office Bldg., E-2
  580 Taylor Ave.
  Annapolis, MD  21401

  Agnes Busacca
  2726 Superior Ave.
  Baltimore, MD 21234
             Michael  Busacca
             2726 Superior Ave.
             Baltimore, MD

             Jim Butch
             US EPA
             841 Chestnut Bldg., 3EP10
             Philadelphia, PA  19107

             Jo  Campbell
             Ecotopics International News Serv.
             P.O. Box 2309
             Ocean City, MD  21842

             Pat Campbell-White
             Center for Inland Bays
             702 Rehoboth Avenue
             Rehoboth Beach, DE  19971

             Christopher  Carbaugh
             Lawrence T. Whitlock Associates
             3409 Coastal Highway
             Ocean City, MD  21842

             Ron Cascio
             Chestnut Creek, Inc.
             10046 Silver Point Lane
             Ocean City, MD  21842

             James F. Casey
             MD Dept. of Natural Resources
             Matapeake Terminal - Fisheries
             301 Marine Academy  Drive
             Stevensville, MD  21666

             Lisa Challenger *
             Worcester County Tourism
             105 Pearl Street
             Snow Hill, MD  21863

             Lee Anne Chandler
             Critical Areas Commission, MDNR
             45 Calvert St., 2nd Fl.
             Annapolis, MD  21401

             John K. Chlada
             Perdue Farms Inc.
             P.O. Box 1537
             Salisbury, MD 21802
Page 86
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
   John Chubb
   Citizens for a Better Eastern Shore
   P.O. Box 882
   Eastville, VA  23347

   Jessica Cogan
   DE Center for the Inland Bays
   P.O. Box 297
   Naussa, DE 19969

   Sumner Crosby
   US EPA Region III
   841  Chestnut Building, 3EP10
   Philadelphia, PA  19107

   Charlotte A. Cully
   Assateague Coastal Trust
   3802 Perry Hall Rd.
   Perry Hall, MD 21128

   Carolyn Cummins
   West Ocean City Association
   9628 Oceanview Lane
   W. Ocean City, MD  21842

   Dennis W. Dare
   Town of Ocean City
   P.O. Box 158
   Ocean City, MD  21842

   Celia Dawson
   MD Dept. of Natural Resources
   Tawes State Office Bldg., D2
   580 Taylor Ave.
   Annapolis, MD  21401

   Frank Dawson
   MD Dept. of Natural Resources
   Tawes State Office Bldg., E-2
   Annapolis, MD  21401

   George P. Demas
   USDA - Natural Resources Cons. Ser.
   301 Bank Street
   Snow Hill, MD 21863
 Susan Y. Demas
 USDA - Natural Resources Cons. Ser.
 301 Bank Street
 Snow Hill, MD 21863

 Judy  Denver
 U.S. Geological Survey
 300 S. New Street, Rm. 1201
 Dover, DE  19904

 Chester T. Dickerson Jr.
 Draper Dickerson Ent.
 11313 Willowbrook Dr.
 Potomac, MD  20854-2568

 Sally  D. Dickerson
 Draper Dickerson Ent.
 11313 Willowbrook Dr.
 Potomac, MD  20854-2568

 Steve Doctor
 MD Dept. of Natural Resources
 Matapeake Terminal - Fisheries
 301 Marine Academy Drive
 Stevensville, MD  21666

.Mark  Duffy
 Assateague Island Nat'l. Seashore
 7206 National Seashore Lane
 Berlin, MD  21811

 William Dunstan
 Old Dominion University
Norfolk, VA 23529-0276

 Samuel H. Dyke
Glatfelter Pulp Wood Company
P.O. Box 1971
Salisbury, MD  21802-1971

Ajax Eastman
Assateague Coastal Trust
 112 E. Lake Avenue
Baltimore, MD  21212

Beth Ebersole
ICF Kaiser
9300 Lee Highway
Fairfax, VA  22031
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                              Page 87

-------
  Kathleen  Ellett *
  MD Dept of Natural Resources
  Tawes State Office Bldg., E-2
  580 Taylor Ave.
  Annapolis, MD  21401

  Donna R. Emory
  Assateague Coastal Trust
  1525 Bolton Street
  Baltimore, MD  21217

  Richard W. Emory Jr.
  Assateague Coastal Trust
  1525 Bolton Street
  Baltimore, MD  21217

  Pamela L. Eng
  Salisbury State University
  Bioenvirons Club
  312 Gay Street, Apt. 2
  Salisbury, MD 21801

  Steve D. Engel
  Lawrence T. Whitlock Associates
  3409 Coastal Highway
  Ocean City, MD  21842

  Richard Eskin *
  MD Dept. of the Environment
  2500 Broening Highway
  Baltimore, MD  21224

  Joe Farrell
  University of Delaware
  Sea Grant Marine Advisory Service
  700 Pilottown Road
  Lewes, DE  19958

  Joseph W. Fehrer
  Worcester Environmental Trust
  HOW. Federal St.
  Snow Hill, MD  21863

  Ilia J. Fehrer*
  Worcester Environmental Trust
  HOW. Federal St.
  Snow Hill, MD  21863
             Patricia Ficken
             Coalition of Coastal Communities
             Rt. 3, Box 297A
             Selbyville, DE  19975

             Cynthia Field
             MD Dept. of Natural Resources
             580 Taylor Avenue
             Tawes State Office Building, C-2
             Annapolis, MD 21401

             Erin M. Fitzsimmons
             Assateague Coastal Trust
             Salisbury State University
             Political Science Dept.
             Salisbury, MD  21801-6837

             Ingo Fleming
             National Marine Fisheries
             P.O. Box 474
             Ocean City, MD 21842-0474

             R. Warren Flint **
             The Eastern Shore Institute
             P.O. Box 688
             Exmore,VA  23350

             Woody Francis
             Baltimore Dist. Corps of Engineers
             P.O. Box 1715
             Baltimore, MD 21203-1715

             Julia M. Fritz
             Worcester Soil Conservation Dist.
             P.O. Box 97
             Snow Hill, MD 21863

             Rebecca Gast
             MD Geological Survey
             2300 St. Paul St.
             Baltimore, MD 21218

             Elinor Gawel
             Kent County Planning Office   ;.
             103 N. Cross St.
             Chestertown, MD  21620
Page 88
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
  Jim George
  MD Dept. of the Environment
  2500 Broening Highway
  Baltimore, MD  21224

  Barbara Gillespie
  Assateague Coastal Trust
  10046 Silver Point Lane
  Ocean City, MD 21842

  Charles B. Glover
  Ocean Pines Association, Inc.
  239 Ocean Parkway
  P.O. 2700 Ocean Pines
  Berlin, MD  21811

  Michael N. Goldberg
  P.O. Box 548
  Berlin, MD  21811

  Tim Goodger
  Nat'l. Marine Fisheries Service
  904 S. Morris St.
  Oxford, MD 21654

  David Goshom*
  MD Dept. of Natural Resources
  Tawes State Office Bldg., D2
  580 Taylor Ave.
  Annapolis, MD 21401

  Bob Haase
  South Point Association
  7146 Chandler  Drive
  Berlin, MD 21811

  Phil Hager*
  Worcester County
  One W. Market St.
  Room 116 Court House
  Snow Hill, MD  21863-1070

 Robert Hand
 R D Hand and Assoc.
  13354 Cove Landing Road
 Bishopville, MD  21813
 Harriett Hankins
 Dorchester County
 1902 Pig Neck Rd.
 Cambridge, MD  21613

 Audrey  Hansen
 Salisbury State University
 Bioenvirons Club
 9137LiberrytownRd.
 Berlin, MD  21811

 Walter B. Harris
 CWRAC
 13650 Blooming Neck Road
 Worton, MD  21678

 Vema Harrison
 MD Department of Natural Resources
 Tawes State Office Building, C-4
 580 Taylor Avenue
 Annapolis, MD 21401

 Molly Harriss Olson
 President's Coun/Sustainable Devel.
 730 Jackson Place, N.W.
 Washington, DC  20503

 Philip E. Hartman
 Assateague Coastal Trust
 1604RalworthRd.
 Baltimore, MD 21218-2232

 Zlata Hartman
 Assateague Coastal Trust
 1604 Ralworth Rd.
 Baltimore, MD  21218-2232

 Ian Hartwell
 MD Dept. of Natural Resources
 Tawes State Office Bldg., D2
 580 Taylor Ave.
Annapolis, MD  21401

 Sue Hayes
Oceanside Advisory Committee, DNR
Oyster Bay Tackle
 11615 Coastal Highway
Ocean City, MD 21842
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                               Page 89

-------
 John Heisler
 U.S. EPA
 Mail Code 4504-F
 401MSt.,SW
 Washington, DC  20460

 Frederick B. Higgins
 Temple University
 Philadelphia, PA  19122

 Louise Hildreth
 Assateague Coastal Trust
 912RolandvueRoad
 Baltimore, MD 21204

 Margarita Hill
 University of Maryland
 Dept. of Horticulture & L.A.
 College Park, MD 20742-5611

 Charles H. Hocutt *
 University of MD, Eastern Shore
 Princess Anne, MD 21853

 Ralph Hoen
 South Point Association
 7146 Chandler Drive
 Berlin, MD  21811

 Mark L. Homer
 MD Dept. of Natural Resources
 P.O. Box 150
 Piney Point, MD  20674

 Nancy L. Howard
 MD Dept. of Natural Resources
 201 Baptist Street, Suite 22
 Salisbury, MD 21801

 Bill Hulslander
 Assateague  Island Nat'l. Seashore
 7206 National Seashore Lane
 Berlin, MD 21811

 Margot Hunt
 Assateague  Coastal Trust
 P.O. Box 26
 Chincoteague, VA  23336-0026
            Henry W. Immanuel
            2250
            Elliott Island Road
            Elliott Island, MD  21869

            William Jenkins
            MD Dept. of Natural Resources
            Tawes State Office Building, E-2
            580 Taylor Avenue
            Annapolis, MD 21401

            Judy Johnson
            Assateague Coastal Trust
            Broadmead, Apt. K-17
            13801 York Road
            Cockeysville, MD  21030-1808

            Rick Johnstone **
            Delmarva Power & Light
            P.O. Box 1739
            Salisbury, MD  21802-1739

            Evelyn Kampmeyer
            MD Conservation Corps, DNR
            Tawes State Office Building, E-3
            580 Taylor Avenue
            Annapolis, MD 21401

            Lee Karrh
            University of Delaware
            College of Marine Studies
            700 Pilottown Road
            Lewes, DE 19958

            Renee  Karrh
            MD Dept. of Natural Resources
            Tawes State Office Bldg., D2
            580 Taylor Ave.
            Annapolis, MD  21401

            Katie Kause
            MD Dept. of Natural Resources
            Forest, Wildlife & Heritage Service
            201 Baptist St., Suite 22
            Salisbury, MD  21801
Page 90
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
  Joan Kean
  CWRAC
  P.O. Box 269
  Chincoteague, VA  23336-0269

  Frederick  Keer Jr.
  Assateague Coastal Trust
  P.O. Box 21887
  Baltimore, MD 21222-6887

  Willett Kempton
  University of Delaware
  College of Marine Studies
  Newark, DE  19716

  Randall Kerhin
  MD Dept. of Natural Resources
  MD Geological Survey
  2300 St. Paul Street
  Baltimore, MD 12118

  Butch Kinerney
  DE Dept. of Natural Resources
  89 Kings Highway
  P.O. Box 1401
  Dover, DE 19903

  Dennis  G. Klosterman
  Corps of Engineers, Baltimore Dist.
  P.O. Box 1715
  Baltimore, MD  21203

  Chris Klump
  2522 Bayview Rd.
  Girdletree, MD  21829

  Kim A.  Klump
  Worcester County
  One W. Market St.
  Room 116 Court House
  Snow Hill, MD  21863-1070

  Henry Koellein Jr.
  Atlantic Coast Chapter, M.S.S.A.
  538 Marlinspike Drive
  Severna Park, MD 21146-3355
 Marc Koenings
 Assateague Island Nat. Seashore
 7206 National Seashore Lane
 Berlin, MD  21811

 John Koslosky
 9133 5th Street
 Lanham, MD  20706

 Stella Koslosky
 9133 5th Street
 Lanham, MD  20706

 Steven Krasnow
 Assateague Coastal Trust
 12604 Celtic Court
 Rockville, MD  20850

 William K. Kroen
 Wesley College
 120 North Street
 Dover, DE 19901

 Jack Kumer
 Assateague Island Nat'l. Seashore
 7206 National Seashore Lane
 Berlin, MD 21811

 Rick Kutz **
 US EPA, Region III
 Suite 200,201 Defense Hwy.
 Annapolis, MD  21401

 Abigail Lambert *
 Lower Shore Land Trust
 P.O. Box 271
 Secretary, MD  21664

 Chris Lea
 Assateague Island Nat'l. Seashore
 7206 National Seashore Lane
 Berlin, MD 21811

 Cyrus Lesser
MD Dept. of Agriculture
 50 Harry S. Truman Parkway
Annapolis, MD  21401
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                               Page 91

-------
 Mary Jane Lindblad
 DE Center for Inland Bays
 204 West llth St.
 South Bethany, DE  19930

 Cecelia Linder
 University of Delaware
 700 Pilottown Road
 Lewes, DE  19958

 Calvin D. Lubben
 Chesapeake Forest Products Co.
 P.O. Box 300
 Pocomoke City, MD 21851

 Jeanne R. Lynch *
 Worcester County  Commissioner
 10464 Azalea Rd.
 Berlin, MD  21811

 Dale A. Maginnis *
 Delmarva Advisory Council
 P.O. Box 4277
 Salisbury, MD  21803-4277

 Stacey A. Marek *
 Corps of Engineers, Baltimore Dist.
 P.O. Box 1715
 Baltimore, MD  21203-1715

 Joe Margraf
 University of MD, Eastern Shore
 MD Fish & Wildlife Coop Unit
 Room  1120 Trigg Hall
 Princess Anne, MD  21853

 Lora Martin
 DE Center for Inland Bays
 P.O. Box 297
 Nassau, DE  19969

 Lora Martin
 DE Center for the Inland Bays
 P.O. Box 297
 Naussa,DE  19969
            Gregory McCabe
            Center for Inland Bays
            Rt. 2, Box 120-A
            Selbyville, DE  19975

            Michael McCabe
            US EPA Region III Administrator
            841 Chestnut Street
            Philadelphia, PA  19107

            John McCloud
            NOAA
            ,MD

            Jack N. McDonald
            York (PA) Suburban School District
            455 Sundale Drive
            York, PA  17547

            Susan McDowell
            US EPA Region III
            841 Chestnut Building, 3EP1O
            Philadelphia, PA  19107

            Margaret McGinty
            MD Dept. of Natural Resources
            Tawes State Office Bldg., D2
            580 Taylor Ave.
            Annapolis, MD  21401

            James McGowan
            Accomack-Northampton Planning Dist.
            P.O. Box 417
            Accomac,VA  23301

            J. Chapman McGrew Jr.
            Salisbury State University
            Dept. Geography/Regional Planning
            212DevilbissHall
            Salisbury, MD  21801

            Kate Meade
            MD  Dept. of Natural Resources
            Tawes State Office Building, B-3
            580 Taylor Avenue
            Annapolis, MD  21401
Page 92
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
   Joseph N. Melson  Jr.
   P.O. Box 1468
   Bethany Beach, DE 19930

   Cornelia Melvin
   The Nature Connection
   24 Pack Lane
   Lewes, DE  19958

   Mark Mendelsohn
   Corps of Engineers, Baltimore Dist.
   P.O. Box 1715
   Baltimore, MD 21203-1715

   Samantha Metcalf
   Perm State University
   4101  WoodleyDr.
   Alexandria, VA 22309

   Andy  Meyer
   CWRAC, Harford County MD
   220 South Main Street
   Bel Air, MD  21014

   Bruce Michael
   MD Dept. of Natural Resources
   Tawes State Office Bldg., D2
   580 Taylor Ave.
   Annapolis, MD  21401

   Saralynn C. Molliver
   Assateague Coastal Trust
   110 Woodbrook Lane
   Baltimore, MD 21212

  Ralph Moore
  Perdue Farms
  P.O. Box 1537
  Salisbury, MD  21802-1537

  Dana  Morris-Jones
  Morris-Jones Associates
  279 Fairtree Plaza
  Sevema Park, MD  21146
  William F. Moyer
  DE Dept.  of Natural Resources
  89 Kings Highway
  PO Box 1401
  Dover, DE 19903,

  Laura Murray
  University of MD, Horn Point
  P.O. Box 775
  Cambridge, MD  21613

  Robert W. Nelson
  Ocean Pines Association
  239 Ocean Parkway
  2700 Ocean Pines
  Berlin, MD 21811

 Vivian Newman *
 MD Wetlands Committee
  11194 Douglas Ave.
 Marriottsville, MD 21104-1622

 Bruce E. Nichols
 USDA - Natural Resources Cons. Ser.
 301 Bank Street
 Snow Hill, MD 21863

 Raymond Nomes
 South Point Association
 7146 Chandler Drive
 Berlin, MD  21811

 John C. North
 Chesapeake Bay Critical Areas Comm.
 45 Calvert Street
 Annopolis, MD  21401

 Katherine Nowarth
 Newark, De

 Peter  Noy
 Corps of Engineers, Baltimore Dist.
 P.O. Box 1715
 Baltimore, MD 21203-1715

 Mary  Ochse
Assateague Coastal Trust
P.O. Box  551
Ocean City, MD 21842
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                              Page 93

-------
Bill  Painter
US EPA
Office Policy Planning/Evaluation
USEPA, Mail Code 2124,401 M ST.,SW
Washington, DC  20460

Tom  Parham
MD Dept. of Natural Resources
Tawes State Office Bldg., D2
580 Taylor Ave.
Annapolis, MD  21401

Mitch Parker
Frontier Town Campground
P.O. Box 691
Ocean City, MD  21842

R. G. Parks
Kegotank Bay Clam Co.
19081 Glenn Drive
Parksley.VA 23421

Jim  Parsons
Perdue Farms Inc.
P.O. Box 1537
Salisbury, MD 21802

John W. Passwater
99 Woods Drive
Lewes, DE  19958

Tom Patton
Assateague Coastal Trust
P.O. Box 578
Berlin, MD  21811

Michael  Peirson
Cherrystone Aqua-Farms
P.O. Box 347
Cheriton,VA  23316

Robert Perciasepe
US EPA, Asst. Admin, for Water
Washington, DC

Grace W. Pierce-Beck *
Delaware Audubon Society
20 Muirfield Court
 Dover, DE  19904
           Christina Pompa
           206 Windsor Avenue
           Centreville, MD  21617

           Stephanie Poole
           University of Delaware
           Center for Study of Marine Policy
           301 Robinson Hall
           Newark, DE  19711

           Shirley Price
           Murray's Bait & Tackle
           RD 2 Box 120
           Millville, DE'  19970

           Kent S. Price **
           DE Center for Inland Bays
           P.O. Box 297
           Nassau, DE 19969

           Til Purnell
           SWAB
           R.D. 6, Box 98
           Millsboro,DE  19966

           Rose Railey
           Assateague Island Nat'l. Seashore
           7206 National Seashore Lane
           Berlin, MD 21811

           John Ramsay
           Assateague Coastal Trust
           6009 Lake Manor Dr.
           Baltimore, MD 21210

           Marsha Ramsay **
           Assateague Coastal Trust
           6009 Lake Manor Dr.
           Baltimore, MD 21210

           Bruce A. Richards *
           DE Center for Inland Bays
           P.O. Box 297
           Nassau, DE  19969

           Spencer Rowe
           12409 Kent Road
           Ocean City, MD 21842
Page 94
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
  Bill  Satterfield
  Delmarva Poultry Industry
  RD 6, Box 47
  Georgetown, DE 19947-9622

  Jeff  Schoellkoff
  P.O. Box 237
  Warren, VT  05674

  Pat Schrawder
  Baywatch
  12808 Harbor Rd.  -.-_.
  Ocean City, MD  21842

  John D.  Schroer *
  U.S.  Fish & Wildlife Service
  Chincoteague NWR
  P.O.  Box 62
  Chincoteague, VA 23336

  Gwynne  Schultz **
  MD Dept. of Natural Resources
  Tawes State Office Bldg., E-2
  580 Taylor Ave.
  Annapolis, MD  21401

  Chris Shelton
  Town Creek Foundation
  P.O. Box 159
  Oxford, MD  21654

  Diana L. Sienicki
  21 Cognac Drive
  Newark, DE  19702

  Michael L. Sienicki
  21 Cognac Drive
  Newark, DE  19702

  Anne Sloan
  MD Dept. of Natural Resources
  Tawes State Office Building, E-2
  580 Taylor Avenue
  Annapolis, MD   21401

  Evan Smith
  The Conservation Fund
  1800  North Kent street, Suite  1120
  Arlington, VA 22209
 Kevin M. Smith
 MD Dept. of Natural Resources
 Tawes State Office Bldg., E-2
 Annapolis, MD  21401

 Ray Smith
 Balfour Holdings Inc.
 1180 Sunrise Valley Dr., Suite 925
 Reston,VA 22091

 Kelly  Snannahan
 Worcester County
 Room  112 Court House
 One West Market Street
 Snow Hill, MD  21863

 Ralph  Spagnolo
 U.S. EPA, Region III
 841 Chestnut Bldg., 3EP30
 Philadelphia, PA 19107

 Carl F. Steinitz
 Harvard University
 Graduate School of Design
 48 Quincy Street
 Cambridge, MA  02138

 Charlie Stek
 Sen. Paul Sarbanes'Office -
 Washington, DC

 Naki Stevens
 Restore America's Estuaries
 1400 16th St. NW, Room 236
 Washington, DC 20036

 Barbara E. Stratton
 Corps of Engineers, Phila. District
 Wanamaker Building
 100 Perm Square East
 Philadelphia, PA 19107-3390

David Sutherland
The Conservation Fund
 1800 North Kent Street, Suite 1120
Arlington, VA  22209
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                               Page 95

-------
  Betsy Tarn
  US EPA
  1079 South Fprest Drive
  Arlington, VA  22204

  Jack Tarburton
  DE Dept. of Agriculture
  ,MD

  Mitchell Tamowski
  MDNR Shellfish Program
  361  Sherwood Trail
  Annapolis, MD 21401

  Steve Taylor
  U.S. EPA
  401MSt.,SW
  Washington, DC  20460

  Allen B. Teasley
  Broadwater Academy
  P.O. Box 546
  Exmore,VA  23350

  Cal  Thomas
  Salisbury State University
  Dept. of Geography
  Salisbury, MD  21801

  Terry Thompson *
  Virginia Coast Reserve - TNC
  P.O. Box 158
  Nassawadox, VA 23413

  Paul C. Ticco
  Critical Areas Commission
  45 Calvert St.
  Annapolis, MD  21401

  Carol Toomey
  Assateague Coastal Trust
  15004 Reserve Road
  Accokeek,MD 20607-9403

  Amanda  Truett
  Wildfowl Trust of North America
  Horsehead Wetlands Center
  600 Discovery Lane, P.O. Box 519
  Grasonville, MD  21638
             Barry Truitt
             The Nature Conservancy
             Virginia Coast Reserve
             P.O. Box 158
             Nassawadox, VA  23413

             Jerry Truitt
             Delmarva Poultry Industry
             RD 6, Box 47
             Georgetown, DE  19947-9622

             John G. Trumpower
             12943 Windy Drive
             Ocean City, MD 21842

             Alice M. Tweedy
             3522 Figgs Landing road
             Snow Hill, MD  21813

             Lexia Valdes
             University of Delaware
             700 Pilottown Road
             Lewes, DE  19958

             Elizabeth Valentine
             MD Dept. of Natural Resources
             Tawes State Office Bldg., E-2
             580 Taylor Ave.
             Annapolis, MD  21401

             Eric S. Walbeck *
             Assateague Coastal Trust
             HOMarykay Road
             Timonium, MD 21093

             Larry Walton
             Chesapeake Forest Products Co.
             P.O. Box 300
             Pocomoke City, MD  21851

             Perry Weed
             Rep. Wayne Gilchrest's Office
             12 IN. Washington St.
             Easton, MD 21601

             Thomas Weiss  *
             MD Office of Planning
             201 Baptist St.,  Suite 24
             Salisbury, MD  21801
Page 96
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
    Darlene V. Wells
    Maryland Geological Survey
    2300 St. Paul Street
    Baltimore, MD  21218

    Alan E. Wesche
    MD Dept. of Natural Resources
    Matapeake Terminal - Fisheries
    301 Marine Academy Drive
    Stevensville, MD 21666

    Lee Whaley
    Sen. Paul Sarbanes' Office
    Salisbury, MD 21801

    Christopher Williams
    MD Geological Survey
    2300 St. Paul St.
    Baltimore, MD  21218

    Lana Williams
    Worcester County Public Schools
    6270 Worcester Highway
   Newark, MD  21841

   Stephen N. Williams
   DE Dept. of Natural Resources
   89 Kings Highway
   P.O. Box 1401
   Dover, DE 19903

   Roger C. Williamson
   100 Woods Dr.
   Lewes, DE 19958

   Carolyn  Windsor
   Assateague Coastal Trust
   8406 Maymeadow Court
   Baltimore, MD  21244

   Sandy Winter
   Wor-Wic Community College
   32000 Campus Drive
   Salisbury, MD  21801
  Philip Wirth
  Univ. of MD, Eastern Shore
  MD Fish & Wildlife Coop Unit
  TriggHall, Rm. 1120
  Princess Anne, MD  21853

  Philip Wirth
  University of MD, Eastern Shore
  MD Fish & Wildlife Coop Unit
  Room 1120 TriggHall
  Princess Anne, MD  21853

  Harry Womack
  Salisbury State University
  Department of Biology
  Salisbury,  MD 21801

  Frances A. Wright
  Assateague Coastal Trust
  15004 Reserve Road
 Accokeek, MD 20607-9403

 Marie Youngs
 Assateague Coastal Trust
 P.O. Box 731
 Berlin, MD 21811

 Ann Zahn
 7814GlenbrookRoad
 Bethesda, MD 20814

 Theodore Zahn
 7814GlenbrookRoad
 Bethesda, MD 20814

 Mark Zankel
 The Nature  Conservancy, DE Chapter
 321 South State Street
 Dover, DE  19901

 Nick Zimmerman
 University of MD, Eastern Shore
 Princess Anne, MD 21853

Carl S. Zimmerman *
Assateague Island Nat'l. Seashore
7206 National Seashore Lane
Berlin, MD  21811
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
                                                                                     Page 97

-------
                                   APPENDIX B

                     CONFERENCE EVALUATION FORM




Please turn in this completed form at the end of the conference.

1. Did the conference meet your expectations?   73 Yes  10 No

2. The conference was

   Well organized     75 Yes  4 No
   Informative         76 Yes  I No
   Good presentations  68 Yes  6 No

   How could the conference have been improved?

   Comments: Audio-visuals should have been suitable for large audience and large room so all
   could see. Some presentations not effective. More local officials, developers, local citizens should
   have attended. Subject matter too general. More breaks needed.

3. How were the conference accommodations?
   Meeting rooms
   Food
34 Good 36 Fair  U. Poor
35 Good 40 Fair  6 Poor
   Comments:  Too cold and noisy in breakout groups.

4. Should this conference set the stage for followup actions?

   81 Yes  0 No

   Future Conferences  70 Yes 5 No
   Newsletters         69 Yes 5 No
   Committees         62 Yes 3 No

   If YES, what issues should be addressed?

    Comments: Most respondents stressed need for public education and involvement and cited issues
   raised at conference (agricultural practices, development, tourism, fishing) as well as good land
   planning, preservation of fragile areas, and updates on three-state efforts as being most important
    issues for future focus.
 Page 98
                                         DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
    If YES, at what governmental level?

    49 Local (County)  34 State  59 Delmarva-wide

 5. Are you willing to commit your time and/or money to ensure follow up actions are successful?
    71 Yes  5 No

 6. What is your personal vision for the future of Delmarva's Coastal Bays?

    Comments:  There was considerable agreement that nature and human needs be in harmony:
    affordable and good quality of life; clean environment; open space; reasonable growth; protection
    of sensitive areas such as wetlands and shorelines; good fishing; clean bays throughout Delmarva.

 7. How can this vision best be achieved?

    Comments:  There was considerable support for education of all citizens,  visitors and political
    leaders; for better planning for growth, involving all stakeholders and including reduction of
    waterside development and putting sensitive lands in conservation; for local zoning ordinances
    to protect sensitive areas and guide development to already developed areas  and away from
    wetlands and shorelines. Everyone working together: cooperate, build consensus, stop finger-
   pointing.

 8. What role do you envision for elected and appointed  officials?

    Comments: There was almost unanimous agreement that officials need to listen to stakeholders'
    concerns and lead an effort toward sensible growth in the  region that considers responses
   summarized in 6 &  7 above. Elected officials, most believe, should lead public education and
    involvement efforts and fund projects that protect and restore fragile and sensitive areas. Other
   suggestions include creating incentives to businesses that operate in environmentally protective
   ways and establishing user fees to pay for restoration. There was considerable criticism  of local
   elected officials who chose not to attend the conference. There was additional criticism that these
   officials tend to make decisions that favor special,  rather than public, interests. Most  agreed,
   however, that it's time to move forward together.
Total attendance at the conference was 269. The summary above is based on the 83 Evaluation Forms
that were turned in at the end of the conference, representing 31 percent of conference attendees.
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
Page 99

-------
                                     APPENDIX C
                             REMAINING QUESTIONS
Following the panel discussion on the environmental and economic status of the coastal bays and their
watersheds,  conference participants were provided with a 15-minute break in which to develop
questions for any of the panelists or resource experts. For the remainder  of the hour, the panelists
and resource experts addressed several questions, which are presented on page 60.  Due to the
overwhelming number of questions and limited time, however, the majority could not be discussed.
This Appendix lists these other questions that remain for future discussion.

1.  How can overuse/abuse of resources be prevented or curtailed?

2.  Discussions of this conference have all emphasized sustainable development practices as a means
    of assuring good quality of life  and healthy ecosystems for the future.   If this  approach is
    adopted, we will need a means to persuade the public to adopt this idealogy.  Will there be any
    focus on the economic benefits of sustainable development approaches that can be translated to
    pocketbook savings meaningful to the individual taxpayers?

3.  We keep talking about growth management and control. This issue has even been addressed in
    comprehensive management  plans.  So,  why  are growth limits/boundaries not drawn and
    implemented by co-governments? Why don't we do what Portland has done?

4.  How much of the original wetlands have been lost to development over the years?

5.  The majority of attendees are either from the government or are involved in grass roots efforts.
    How do we involve in the planning process those people in the middle?

6.  What efforts are underway to enact better land use planning mechanisms  such as:  transfer of
    development rights and cluster zoning to  create  open space, etc.?

7.  The perception among citizens is that their input is not truly desired because they may not be
    qualified or have a different agenda that is contrary to the environmental protection. This is not
    true!  They offer real time,  on-site data.  However, they may  need  more information.  What
    efforts will be made to inform and involve the public?

 8.  Why not set up a "Tributary Strategies" type process for the Coastal Bays involving DE,  MD and
    VA? Since nutrients are the major problem, a "Coastal Bays Strategies" would involve  citizens,
     local, state and federal governments, businesses and environmental groups, and could concentrate
     on specific issues that are unique to each state's coastal bays.
 Page 100
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
 9.   We have heard about limited resources, but have not tapped our most available - volunteers.  The
     governmental agencies do not seem to  have had,  as  a part of their process, harnessing this
     resource for gathering data, interviewing people and in general creating an army of extra help.
     Can you do more to integrate public groups into your teams?  Example:  Ocean Pines has several
     groups to help:  Boat Club, Fishing Club (Anglers), Power Squadron, and individuals.

 10.  It was mentioned that the benthic community in southern Chincoteague Bay was in good shape
     and that northern Indian River Bay was in poor shape.  Does this  indicate a general north to
     south trend in degradation which may correspond  with numbers of individual septic systems
     going north to south?  Were the northern Indian River Bay sites and the southern Chincoteague
     Bay sites sampled simultaneously?

 11.  Do manmade canals act as a sump keeping runoff pollutants from entering the main bodies of
     water in the bays?

 12.  What are the largest sources of nutrient pollution into  the bays?  What causes the oxygen and
     toxic chemicals?  What two to three things would have the most impact on reduction?

 13.  Are county economic  development and tourism staff talking to planning and zoning staff to
     ensure that natural resource amenities that serve as attractions to companies to locate in this area
     are protected?  If so, how is the planning process affected?

 14.  Functionally,  a  stand of trees does not make a forest.  What is Delaware doing to foster a
     sustainable forestry ethic among its forest industry?

 15.  Hasn't Delaware put the cart before the horse by creating major access  routes between its bays
     and beaches and the metropolitan areas to the north before establishing, fully, management plans
     relating to the coastal area?

 16.  What about the loss of biodiversity associated with Loblolly Pine Plantations; i.e., less of mixed
     hardwoods and old growth forest? How will this highly potential problem be addressed?

 17.  Is the environmental degradation in the north, i.e., Delaware Bay, reversible?

 18.  How will the new Farm Bill affect Delmarva agriculture ("Freedom to Farm")?

 19. Are the tree farms monoculture?  If so, is there any effort to change this?

20. Has  the amount  of eutrophication caused by agriculture and human habitation been quantified?

21. What needs  to  be done to stop  eutrophication?   If implemented,   how long to see an
     improvement?

22. What has caused the decrease in spot and mullets  in Indian River?

23. Who is  benefitting from the poultry industry on the  shore?

24. How would life  change if the poultry  industry was not  here?
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
Page 101

-------
25. For the benefit of the eastern shore, agriculture should diversify!

26. Is it true that intensive farming (use of pesticides, fertilizers, manure, etc.) is indicated in the
    nonpoint source of pollution?  What role does the poultry industry play?  Please discuss the
    economic and environmental bad buys; how it got that way and what needs to be done.

27. Ecotourism is a developing  concept globally.  Where is Delmarva going with this concept, or
    have they even considered marketing this concept?

28. Is it feasible to promote (or require) trapping of storm  runoff from farms and elsewhere into
    ponds? These could serve as sediment traps, sources of irrigation water, recreational fishing etc.
    and help lessen bay pollution.

29. Do  you know of any way to "garner" the numbers of individual  farmers who are implementing
    BMPs on their own but aren't being "captured" in existing reporting systems? This would be a
    valuable  information/education  source for the general public to realize farmers, on a whole, are
    good  stewards.

30. What is the adverse impact  of tree farms on the ecosystems (include use of toxics, pesticides,
    fertilizers, etc.)?

31. Do the fish that we find  in the  ocean spawn in the coastal bays, and if so, what percentage?

32. Offering incentives to recreational fishermen for  filling out a simplified survey before a fishing
    license is issued.

33. How  can you reconcile your studies showing no fisheries stock change in MD waters over the
    past 20 years with the undoubted severe decline  in the flounder fishery?

34. For discussions of water quality, no one has mentioned the trends  in sediment loads in the bays
    or the actual effects of sediments on SAV; etc.  What are the trends and effects?

35. Rick  Kutz stated that species in Chincoteague Bay "haven't changed in 20  years." Does that
    mean that healthy populations of fish and shellfish exist?

36. Dredging of clams during  winter months disturbs crab beds and also  creates serious silting
    conditions in the shallow water bays. Please comment on whether it may be desirable to modify
    the practice of dredging.

37. Recently proposed crab regulations are geared to conditions  in the Chesapeake Bay and do not
    adequately address the problems of over-crabbing in the coastal bays. Please comment on the
    need for additional conservation measures such as establishing sanctuary areas where commercial
    crabbing would be prohibited and also placing greater restriction  on the taking of sooks.

38. If dredging brings up toxic chemicals and is considered bad and submerged vegetation is  so
    important, why are hydraulic clam dredges allowed to operate in our beleaguered bays?
 Page 102
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference

-------
 39.  In the species changes that have occurred in Delaware Coastal Bays, has there been biomass shifts
     as well?  In the Maryland Bays has there been number changes;  i.e.,  have numbers and age
     classes shown declines while species composition may be insignificantly changed?

 40.  What is ASMFC doing about the decline of the horseshoe crab population and its impact on
     shorebirds and fin fish?

 41.  Secretary of Agriculture DE brought this home:  in other words, economics controls everything
     including conservation, which is unfortunate for the planet!  For me, I am in a quandary since
     my employment is dependent  upon agriculture yet it is clear that  how things are done are
     controlled first by economics not conservation.  We find ourselves educating how to conserve
     based on economics, which is not always the correct way.

 42.  Why not require a salt water recreational  fishing  license (like hunting) that requires "catch"
     information to  help assess the resource "taken" and enhance knowledge of scientists?  (Should
     be done statewide)

 43.  Is recreational  water  usage and aquaculture  compatible in populated areas  such as that
     surrounding Ocean City?

 44.  Isle  of Wright  Bay's  filling with  sand  in its interior sections, probably due to the severe
     channeling of its two (east and west) sides and due to the addition of rock pilings by the Route
     50 bridges.   What environmental impacts will the continued reshaping of the  bay have?  Is
     anyone doing anything to combat those manmade changes?

 45.  Studies show that industrial  tourism coupled with corporate farming practices  are a major
    contributor to  loss  and degradation of critical  fmfish nursery and  spawning habitat in  the
    Delmarva Bays. The ASMFC manage both weakfish and winter flounder which occur here and
    are in serious decline.  What is  the ASMFC doing to address this matter?

 46. Can a resort community like Ocean  City be made to stop - by overbuilding, overcrowding, and
    overstressing utilities and water supplies - the destruction of the natural features tourists come
    to enjoy?

 47. Where was the Army Corps of Engineers, the EPA, Assateague Coastal Trust, etc. when the last
    remaining shoreline  of West Ocean City (including  Captain's Point) were  allowed to be
    developed by a few very wealthy people, thus excluding all of the mostly working class people
    of West Ocean  City from their beaches that they have used for generations. The only people I
    noticed at the local hearings were worried "summer people" and lawyers for wealthy property
    owners.  "Locals" say "oh, the EPA was bought off."

48. Seems to be an absence of those involved in tourism; perhaps having them as the tourism experts
    would have been wiser than using the government employees.  What efforts are being made to
    involve the general public and to educate them in this conference so they could participate with
    some "real time" information?

49. What is your organization doing, or what can it do to  support ecotourism  ventures? Is there
    financial or logistical support? Can you advise of grant monies that may be available?
DELMARVA's Coastal Bay Watersheds, 1996 Conference
Page 103
                                                             •U.S. Government Printing Office: 1996 — 750-001/41023

-------

-------