Preface: Purpose of this document & how to read the edits

1. 
   MDE will evaluate the implementation of current state and federal laws by reviewing authorizations and exemptions. MDE will also evaluate the adequacy of BMP's (especially those required for agricultural and silvicultural activities such as buffers), compliance with BMPs, and letters of authorization (e.g., small acreage authorization of cumulative 5,000 ft.), and determine by activity or area if current programs provide adequate protection. Supplemental – create a BMP inventory for TMDLs
   
2. 
   MDE will include a Coastal Bay Area component in its statewide wetland conservation plan. Supplemental – Policy Committee Quantifiable Goal #4- Increase the amount of wetlands by 10,0000 by 2014
   
3. 
   MDE and WC will determine alternatives for additional wetlands protection where needed and consider Supplemental
   

1. 
   Designation of additional areas as "wetlands of special state concern" in state regulations. Modify – review DNR’s newly nominated areas and follow through with designation.
   
2. 
   Investigation of more restrictive local requirements for problems unique to the coastal bay area; and Supplemental
   
3. 
   Amendment of state regulations and statutes to address programmatic problems identified during the evaluation (e.g., small acreage authorization now allowed under state law). Supplemental
   

4. 
   WC will modify local law to require wetland delineation with the submission of all site plans (including minor subdivisions). Supplemental
   
5. 
   MDE, DNR, MDA and WC will jointly determine and implement procedures that would prohibit for a minimum of a 5-year period, change in the use of the land from agriculture or forestry on which conversion of wetlands has taken place under exemption in the law. Delete
   

Recommendations from Assessment of Wetland Management in Maryland’s Coastal Bays Watershed (2004) J. Stribling

1. 
   Begin a large scale public education initiative with property owners on the values and vulnerability of wetlands, ways to avoid impacting them, reminders of the legal status (including deed restrictions), and a local phone number for questions or to report violations.
   
2. 
   Develop a Citizen Watch organization, including training of volunteers
   
3. 
   Increase staffing resources to follow up on projects.
   
4. 
   Return to the system of ticketing violators on the spot.[talk to Otto]
   
5. 
   Investigate the possibility of monitoring/reporting of violations from the air during DNR flight missions, possibly using MDE staff to accompany the DNR pilot.
   

A. Institute a formalized process of Project Plan submittal to include an environmental impact assessment at the outset of each project. Alternatively, require a certified wetland delineation report accompanied by a disclaimer signed by the owner/developer.

1. 
   Update the current tidal wetlands maps to reflect changes in sea level, shorelines, etc and to clearly represent all tidal wetlands.
   
2. 
   Update the current nontidal wetland maps to reduce inaccuracies. [what maps are being referred to here?]
   

1. 
   Institute a bonding requirement and/or penalty to guarantee mitigation and compliance with mitigation monitoring requirements.
   
2. 
   Consider instituting a watershed-wide mitigation banking system. [under the new corps mitigation rule, this may not be desirable]
   
3. 
   Establish a program of acquisition or easement on lands for future programmatic mitigation sites to avoid current difficulties in finding sites in a reasonable time frame.
   
4. 
   Perform more detailed functional loss assessments in determining the mitigation required, especially on larger projects; follow the process already started by MDE of development of a functional loss assessment tool for mid-Atlantic wetlands.
   
5. 
   Require mitigation monitoring reports on programmatic mitigation. [statewide issue]
   
6. 
   Improve evaluation of mitigation success
   

A. Reconsider current buffer mitigation exemption, especially where a wetland remains after its buffer is destroyed. [the county can do this but the state cannont]

1. 
   Tidal permits
   

2. 
   Non-tidal permits
   

1. 
   Make available subsets of databases, and more extensive data analysis.
   
2. 
   Document the time at which wetland impacts begin in order to ensure maximum overlap of functioning mitigation wetland area and to record projects that did not occur.
   
3. 
   Add the following information not now collected:
   
   1. 
      Area protected via deed restriction
      
   2. 
      Functional losses for Letter of Authorization permits [don’t have a methodology]
      
   3. 
      Completion/success of creation, restoration, and enhancement projects for cases where mitigation is not required.
      

1. 
   Increase staff assigned to permitting, inspection, and enforcement at the federal, state and county levels as necessary to create an effective wetland management program.
   
2. 
   Make substantial technological record-keeping improvements at all of the above levels.
   

• 
  more consistent and efficient wetlands program implementation
  
• 
  prioritization of most important wetlands for increased protection activities as designated under "wetlands of special state concern" and by requiring wetlands delineation with all site plans
  

DNR, MDE, MDA and USFW restored 450 acres of salt marsh by installing 35 ditch plugs at the E.A. Vaughn Wildlife Management Area in 2008. DNR also installed 42 ditch plugs in mosquito ditches to restore approximately 64 acres saltmarsh at the Isle of Wight Wildlife Management Area. GIS analysis of Assateage Isl. Nat. Seashore found ~27 miles of mosquito ditching. Since 2008, nearly 3 miles of ditches have been restored.

1. 
   MDA will map all existing mosquito ditches and DNR will assist with identifying sensitive species and other habitats needing specific consideration. Modify – research whether open or closed ditches are better for the bays. Examine new effects of technologies & spray policies and ditch management on habitat. Map existing ditches and areas that have been restored.
   
2. 
   MDA will evaluate results of studies outside of Worcester County on mosquito control, open marsh water management, and other mosquito management techniques and develop an approach which includes a combination of management systems applicable to certain sites and dependent on the needs and goals in Worcester. Modify
   
3. 
   MDA will develop informational brochures and other materials on mosquitoes (life cycle & control options), alternative management opportunities and benefits for landowners. Modify
   
4. 
   WC and DNR will assess impacts (negative and positive) of mosquito ditching on plant and wildlife species (e.g., black rail, clapper rail, sharp-tailed sparrow) and other environmental conditions. Modify
   

• 
  inexpensive means to increase wildlife habitat
  
• 
  economically and environmentally less costly approach to managing mosquito infestation
  

1. 
   MCBP will advertise benefits of existing programs. Supplemental
   
2. 
   DNR and USFWS will assist landowners in developing specific management plans for their land. Modify to have MCBP and DNR identify species & habitat areas and develop outreach materials for conservation programs
   
3. 
   DNR and USFWS will provide technical assistance to landowners interested in managing for threatened and endangered species. Consolidate with FW 4.1.2
   
4. 
   LSLT will assist landowners with options such as easements, donations and purchasing. Modify into an annual report for tracking
   
5. 
   DNR will identify financial incentives for landowners and adjacent landowners, which may be economically impacted, to protect threatened and endangered species. Modify
   

• 
  Federally-listed threatened and endangered animals
  
• 
  State-listed threatened and endangered animals
  
• 
  Wildlife species listed as In Need of Conservation
  
• 
  Natural Heritage Program tracked and watchlist animal species
  
• 
  Northeast wildlife species of regional conservation concern
  
• 
  Endemic species
  
• 
  Responsibility species (those for which MD supports the core populations)
  
• 
  Partners in Flight and All Bird Conservation priority species
  
• 
  US Fish & Wildlife Service’s migratory birds of management concern
  
• 
  Colonial waterbirds
  
• 
  Forest interior breeding birds
  
• 
  Shrubland successional breeding birds at risk
  
• 
  Grassland breeding birds at risk
  
• 
  Shorebirds with significant migratory concentrations
  
• 
  Marshland breeding birds (e.g., rails, bitterns, sedge wren) at risk
  
• 
  Reptiles and amphibians at risk
  
• 
  Bats at risk
  
• 
  Small mammals at risk
  
• 
  Terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates at risk
  
• 
  Freshwater fish at risk
  
• 
  American Fisheries Society’s species of concern
  
• 
  Depleted anadromous fish (e.g., shad spp., sturgeon)
  
• 
  Depleted marine invertebrates (e.g., horseshoe crab)
  
• 
  Sensitive aquatic species
  

• 
  enhanced eco-tourism opportunities
  
• 
  richer species diversity
  
• 
  cost-effective approach to protecting threatened and endangered species
  

1. 
   DNR will identify habitat requirements for rare and endangered species and identify potential areas where it may be suitable to establish new habitats. Modify – replace “establish new” with “for restoration”.
   
2. 
   DNR and WC will complete habitat inventory for coastal bays and incorporate findings in new County Comprehensive Plan. Keep
   
3. 
   WC will utilize County Forest Conservation Fund, Rural Legacy, POS and other programs to create, restore, manage or acquire habitat and will identify new programs that may fund habitat protection. Supplemental – restoration or conservation
   
4. 
   MDE will target use of any mitigation funds to complement protection of adjacent habitats to the extent possible. Institutionalized
   

• 
  prioritization and coordination reduces waste of resources targeted for species protection
  
• 
  enhanced eco-tourism opportunities
  
• 
  richer species diversity
  

1. 
   USFWS and DNR will identify target species and habitat needs for reintroduction. Keep
   
2. 
   USFWS and DNR will locate sites which can be managed for reintroduction process. Keep
   
3. 
   DNR and USFWS will investigate mechanisms to protect adjacent landowners (e.g., compensation process as found in the Delaware agreement). Delete
   

• 
  enhanced eco-tourism opportunities
  
• 
  richer species diversity
  

1. 
   DNR will implement the State Wildlife Diversity Conservation Plan (SWDC). The plan will include the following actions;
   
   1. 
      Secure adequate funding at the state, federal, local and private levels to implement the SWDC Plan.
      
      1. 
         Maintain and disseminate appropriate data and GIS data layers on wildlife diversity and key wildlife habitats.
         
   2. 
      Collaborate with partners and appropriate industries during implementation. Utilize public outreach to increase awareness by the public of the value of wildlife diversity conservation garner public support for such.
      
   3. 
      Develop wildlife diversity recreational opportunities to enhance public appreciation for the conservation of wildlife diversity and key habitats that support them.
      
      1. 
         Complete the development of Maryland’s natural community classification and map spatially explicit locations for all natural community types using GIS technology.
         
   4. 
      Identify the most important sites throughout the State for wildlife diversity conservation. Develop a core network of protected wildlife diversity conservation lands to capture the full array of Maryland wildlife species.
      
   5. 
      Develop mechanisms to ensure adequate connectivity of important wildlife sites. Establish effective laws, regulations, and ordinances at the local, state, and federal levels to conserve wildlife diversity.
      
   6. 
      Fully implement all existing recovery plans for threatened and endangered species and species of conservation concern. Adequately enforce existing laws, regulations, and ordinances to protect species of Greatest Conservation Need (GCN).
      
   7. 
      Enlist the support of elected officials at the state, local and federal levels to conserve wildlife diversity. Incorporate wildlife diversity conservation at the local land use planning level.
      
   8. 
      Collaborate with sportsmen’s [and watershed] organizations to effectuate wildlife diversity conservation.
      
   9. 
      Develop and utilize incentives for private landowners to conserve high quality key habitat on their lands.
      
   10. 
       Utilize environmental regulatory programs at the state, local and federal levels to conserve key habitats. Develop and implement invasive species management programs to reduce or prevent impacts to GCN species and key wildlife habitats.
       
   11. 
       Train staff, partners, private landowners, and elected officials on state-of –the-art wildlife diversity conservation science, techniques, and philosophy. Coordinate conservation actions at regional and national levels.
       
   12. 
       Work with private landowners and public land manager to assist with appropriate management for key wildlife habitats and GCN species.
       

2. 
   DNR, MCBP and STAC will use the State Wildlife Diversity Conservation Plan (SWDC) as a basis for developing a terrestrial monitoring plan for the Coastal Bays. The plan will include;
   
   1. 
      Pertinent information on status and trends among songbirds, T & E species, FIDS, forests, wetlands and other components of all FW Challenges.
      

Two aquatic species have been detected; the European green crab and the Japanese shore crab. Nuisance waterfowl – Snow geese and resident Canada geese are widely distributed in the Coastal Bays and have significantly damaged marshes. Assateague Island National Seashore manages for Sika Deer, feral ponies, and has had prescribed burns and treatment of Phragmites. In addition to Phragmites, other problematic plant species include Japanese stiltgrass and Japanese knotweed. Potential forest invaders include the Emerald Ash Borer and the Asian Long-horned Beetle. It is unknown if these all of these species are being monitored or removed.

1. 
   DNR/MDA will decrease the unintentional introduction of invasive/exotic species by: Consolidate a, b, and c, remove “unintentional introduction” and replace with “occurrence of” or “establishment”
   

1. 
   Working with local nurseries and bait shops to stop sale of invasive exotic species (e.g., Kudzu, Purple Loosestrife and green crabs).
   
2. 
   Using appropriate chemical, mechanical, or biological control agents.
   
3. 
   Working with local nursery industry to do general education/outreach.
   

2. 
   DNR will educate the public about the detrimental effects of exotic/invasive species and steps they can take to reduce unintentional transport and introductions. Institutionalized
   
3. 
   DNR will prohibit the intentional introduction of exotic/invasive species into the area when appropriate. Delete
   
4. 
   WC Feral Cat Society will promote feral cat control through education of residents. Supplemental – educational effort
   
5. 
   DNR will implement management recommendations developed by mute swan advisory committee. Done
   
6. 
   DNR will assess feasibility of eradicating nutria. Supplemental – research & ecosystem monitoring