Uncategorized

ACLT Wreaths – A Group Effort

December 5, 2024 By Community Relations Manager

ACLT hosts a Wreath & Greens sale every year on the 1st Saturday in December. For some of our supporters, it marks the official start of their holiday season. But what goes into the making of those wreaths and all the other unique items offered at the sale? Glad you asked!

It Begins with an Invasive Vine ...

Months before the wreath-making and sale, volunteers go out in the woods and cut Oriental bittersweet vines. Bittersweet is non-native and aggressively invasive.

The volunteers make good use of the vines by making dozens of wreath forms which will be used as the base for the wreaths.

Gathering the Greens

On the day before Thanksgiving (which happens to be a Wednesday), the Wednesday Woods Workers get to work gathering greens at Warriors Rest. As has been the tradition for years, they get to take a brief break when the Community Relations Manager arrives with coffee and doughnuts – but then it’s right back to work until the trucks are loaded down with a wide variety of greens.

A call is sent out to other volunteers requesting additional greens, which are added to the piles that are stacked in front of the ACLT office ready to be made into wreaths, swags, etc.

Scroll down to see more wreath-making photos.

Making of the Wreaths

On the Saturday and Sunday after Thanksgiving, more volunteers gather at the ACLT office to make the wreaths. We typically have about 10-15 volunteers there for the entire day on both days. Each wreath can take up to an hour (or more) to make!

Volunteer Spotlight

We are very fortunate to have several volunteers who come back every year to share their special talents. Barbie Hudson (right) is an experienced wreath-maker and makes all the extra-large/extra-full wreaths that you will see at the sale. Barbie also creates swags – some with buoys – and centerpieces.

John Parker (above) is another volunteer that we rely heavily on every year. John is our expert bow maker – he makes all the bows for the wreaths plus extras to sell at the wreath sale. You can also swap out the bow on your wreath if you’d like.

Ralph Nolletti (right), a member of the Outreach & Membership Committee, hand-made, donated and decorated a grapevine wreath that would look stunning on the side of a barn or house. The wreath measures over 36″ in diameter.

Not pictured: Beth Nolletti (suncatchers) and Kevin Donahue (tobacco stick decorations)

Sue Kullen (above) makes beautiful wreaths and is an excellent instructor for inexperienced volunteers.

Inspection & Pricing

The final step (before loading the wreaths into several vehicles and hauling them down to the South Side Trailhead) is to check each wreath to make sure it will last well into the holidays. Autumn Phillips-Lewis, Land Manager (seated) sets the price of each wreath while Addie Brown, CCCC Member, checks each wreath.

More than Just a Wreath Sale

Every year, the wreath and greens sale has grown little by little. This year we have exciting items that are unique to ACLT and will make great gifts.

Wreath Sale & Market Details

We hope to see many of our members and supporters at the wreath sale!

Saturday, December 7th
11am-1pm

South Side Trailhead
1985 Scientists Cliffs Rd
Port Republic, MD

Get there early! We sell out fast!

More Wreath-Making Photos

Forage Fish Surveys at ACLT and Beyond

November 22, 2024 By Community Relations Manager

Note: This blog contains two parts:

Part 1 expands upon an article written by CCCC Member Emily Dunsmore in the Fall 2024 Edition of the Watershed Observer, ACLT’s quarterly newsletter. Read the article here (pg. 10).

Part 2 explains how volunteers from various “Friends of Watersheds” Groups are expanding the fish forage surveys beyond the properties managed by ACLT.

"Small fish and aquatic bugs, called ‘forage’ species, are the unsung heroes of the aquatic ecosystem of Parkers Creek and beyond. These small fish and aquatic insects are the main food source for the larger predator fish and are chronically understudied in fish surveys. Surveys that do focus on forage species are usually limited to sandy beach habitats. This has left a critical gap in the knowledge of the forage species present in other ecosystems."

Emily Dunsmore-2024 Fall Newsletter

Part 1: Three Fish of Clark Creek

By Emily Dunsmore, 2023/2024 CCCC Member

This summer, ACLT started its first forage survey in the non-tidal waters of Clark Creek. Of the fish caught during this forage survey, there were three notable species that highlight just how important forage fish are to the ecosystems they inhabit.

Mummichog (Fundulus heteroclitus)

Mummichog are a species of Killifish, which is part of the Cyprinodontidae family. They’re one of the most common small fish found in shallow aquatic habitats in the Chesapeake Bay. They were the second-most common fish caught during ACLT’s first forage survey. Often found in schools, this fish is an opportunistic feeder that eats a wide range of foods, including insects and aquatic worms, but most notably, mosquito larvae.

Mummichog were the first fish sent to space! As part of a mission in 1973, two mummichog and 50 mummichog eggs were sent to NASA’s space station, Skylab, to study the effects of microgravity on fish (Smithsonian National Zoo & Conservation Biology Institute, 2024). Mummichogs can live in a vast variety of conditions and are found in both fresh and brackish water. They have a high pollution tolerance and a swim bladder that can act as a “primitive lung.” They can manually fill their swim bladder with air in conditions with little to no dissolved oxygen. This fish has little value to humans either commercially or recreationally, but they are often used in research due to their ability to tolerate a wide variety of conditions. They are often used in studies exploring the sensitivity of fish to environmental stressors (Schulte, 2013). Despite having little inherent value to humans, these small fish are an essential part of the Chesapeake Bay watershed food web. Mummichog, along with other small fish, are a key food source for larger, commercially-valuable fish and for predatory birds.

Brown Bullhead Catfish (Ameiurus nebulosus)

When you imagine a catfish, usually you’d imagine a large fish that would be impossible to find in a minnow trap. However, the small, juvenile catfish were a very common catch in the late summer!

Brown bullhead catfish are a native, bottom-feeding fish that are common in the freshwater and brackish streams that are tributaries of the Chesapeake Bay. They can grow up to 20 inches in length and usually prefer slow-moving, soft-substrate waters. They use their whisker-like barbels on the underside of their mouth to sense and find prey, which can include algae, insects, and other fish (Chesapeake Bay Program, 2024). As small fish, juvenile brown bullheads school in shallow water and are a food source for larger predator species including birds, perch, sunfish, and even snapping turtles.

American Eel (Anguilla rostrata)

The American eel has long fascinated humans due to its complex and mysterious life cycle. As the Chesapeake Bay region’s only catadromous fish, it lives most of its life in rivers, estuaries, and lakes before making the long, arduous journey to the Sargasso Sea to reproduce and die. These fish are carnivorous and often eat insects, fish eggs, and frogs. American eels are an immensely valuable species. They can serve as an indicator species due to their sensitivity to low dissolved oxygen (Hill, 1969), and they are an important food source for larger predatory species of fish and birds. These eels can also be an important host organism for native mussel larvae, which attach to the gills of eels temporarily, and then eventually drop off and burrow into the substrate. These native mussels play a large role in filtering the water of the Chesapeake Bay (Maryland Department of the Environment, 2024).

American eels are listed as endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), due to a dwindling population as a result of both human and non-human causes. Barriers to migration, habitat loss, and climate change are only a few of the threats to this species (IUCN Red List, 2020). Despite being listed as endangered by the IUCN, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s assessment in 2015 found that it did not meet the standards to be listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act, despite having depleted population numbers (IUCN Red List, 2020).

The American eel was my most surprising (and most slippery!) species found during the forage survey. Although they are common to find in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, it was interesting to find them in Clark Creek, so far inland from Parkers Creek and the Bay. Finding them in Clark Creek really showcased how far these fish travel from where they are born in the Sargasso Sea, about 650 miles away.

Part 1 References

Part 2: Friends Groups Take on Forage Surveys

Since April, the Friends groups of Southern Maryland have been participating in forage surveys to learn what fish are in their waterways and to expand the overall knowledge about forage species in different Chesapeake Bay tributaries. ACLT has helped form and coordinate six watershed Friends groups in Calvert County: Friends of Hunting Creek, Friends of St. Leonard Creek, Friends of Mill Creek, Friends of Hellen Creek, Friends of Fishing Creek, and Friends of Hall Creek. Of these six Friends groups, three have begun forage sampling, often off of Friends group members’ personal docks.

“Forage,” which is defined as small fish and invertebrates that sustain and feed a larger aquatic predator population, is chronically understudied in fish surveys. Additionally, all of the surveys focused on forage species in the Chesapeake Bay have primarily been done with seine nets on tidal, sandy beaches, meaning that other kinds of habitat have not been properly sampled. This has led to a critical gap in knowledge about forage species. This data gap inspired the creation of “forage surveys” across the Chesapeake Bay region, led by Morgan State University’s Patuxent Environmental Aquatic Research Lab (PEARL) and spearheaded by Dr. Tom Ihde. In years past, four other organizations have participated in these forage surveys, with sites in tidal waters as far north as Havre de Grace and as far south as the James River. This year, after two training sessions led by Dr. Ihde, the Friends groups joined the forage sampling effort, effectively adding three new watersheds to PEARL’s dataset.

Of the six Friends groups, three have taken up forage surveys in their watershed: Friends of Hunting Creek, Friends of St. Leonard Creek, and Friends of Mill Creek. Because these are citizen science surveys, they are dependent on citizens having access to waterways. Luckily, many active members of the Friends of Mill Creek and Friends of St. Leonard Creek have waterfront properties. As of July 2024, there are three citizens sampling three sites in St. Leonard Creek, and three citizens sampling six sites in Mill Creek. The Friends of Hunting Creek has fewer active members with waterfront property, so a core group of four members has joined together to sample one site. Because the forage surveys are citizen-led, there is flexibility for samplers to conduct surveys as frequently or infrequently as they are able. Some of the Friends groups’ forage samplers have conducted surveys daily or weekly, while others have committed to once a month.

Forage sampling is a great way to participate in citizen science efforts, get to know which fish species are in nearby waterways, learn how to identify fish, and add to the information available about forage species in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed as a whole. Additionally, it is relatively inexpensive to conduct forage sampling because almost all of the supplies (except the data sheets) are reused every time sampling occurs, making it a relatively accessible way to get involved with citizen science.

Want to get involved with forage sampling? Email Mary (mary@acltweb.org) to learn more.

PCHT Oral History-Sisters Delois Harrod Johnson and Phyllis Harrod Dawkins

June 14, 2024 By Community Relations Manager

The American Chestnut Land Trust Parkers Creek Heritage Trail team has been conducting oral history interviews for the Parkers Creek Heritage Trail project (more information about the project here: https://www.acltweb.org/index.php/parkers-creek-heritage-trail/).

The project looks at all aspects of regional history, with a special emphasis on African American families and their experiences. This emphasis is strongly felt in the oral history effort. In September 2021, project team members interviewed Yvonne Mason Wills, age 93, who told about family connections to Brown’s United Methodist Church, where several of her family members have been buried. In December 2022, the team interviewed Ruth “Becky” Parker Harrod (1934-2023). Harrod had been employed over the years by the Gravatt family, founders of the Scientists’ Cliffs cottage community, and Dr. Page Jett, for many years the owner of Warrior’s Rest, a property at the mouth of Parkers Creek. In July 2023, the team interviewed Shawn Harrod, a man with many connections to people living near Parkers Creek. For more information about these and other remarkable families, see The African American Community of Parkers Creek, circa 1800-1960 https://bit.ly/PrkCrkCommBook.

On April 12, 2024, team members Darlene Harrod and Kirsti Uunila interviewed the sisters Delois Harrod Johnson, 72, and Phyllis Harrod Dawkins, 70, who spent much of their childhood at their grandparents’ farm on Scientists Cliffs Road, a short distance south of Parkers Creek. Also participating in the interview were Shirley Knight, Saroja Raman, and Carl Fleischhauer.

Scroll down for video excerpts from the interview.

Below are some highlights from the interview. Scroll to bottom to view video excerpts of the interview.

Life on Grandparents' Farm

In the 1950s and 1960s, parents George, Sr., and Helen Mae Wallace Harrod and their children, including Johnson and Dawkins, lived with grandfather John Cephas Wallace and grandmother Hattie Commodore Wallace on the Wallace’s 81-acre farm, bought in 1926. Dawkins remembered her grandfather working in the fields and orchard and her grandmother working in the house. Dawkins said, “He had . . . a vast [amount of] land. He stayed out for long, long hours. So, he would hook the plow to the horse, and would be plowing the field.”

“And while he [grandfather] did that [farming], my grandmother would be in [the] house. And they made sure that, you know, at lunchtime my grandfather would come in,” Dawkins said. “My grandmother just had a knack for [baking]. They didn’t measure anything. So, we never knew how much they actually put in. However they did it, it turned out [fine].”

The children enjoyed their grandparents’ farm. Dawkins said although they were told not to eat the green apples because “they weren’t ripe yet,” they did anyway and got stomach aches. They were also told not to disturb the watermelons, but they still sneaked into the patch. “So, we’d get chastised for that, but it didn’t matter,” she said. “To the right of the patch, my grandfather had a beehive. Yeah, he made his honey.”

Raising Tobacco

Phyllis Dawkins recalled working tobacco as a child, doing modest chores suitable for her age. “Yeah, kid things,” she said. “It taught us. And kids nowadays have no idea, . . . the, the history or the love that we shared as growing up as a big family on the farm. . . . And as the tobacco grew [and was ready to harvest], we’d drop the sticks. I wasn’t one to spear [the stalks for hanging] ’cause I didn’t know how to do that. So, I was the one that dropped sticks.” Delois Johnson mentioned that she liked working outdoors and helped with planting and stripping tobacco.

Connection to Brown's Church

Like most Black families near Parkers Creek in the mid-20th century, the Wallaces, Commodores, and Harrods attended Brown’s United Methodist Church on Parkers Creek Road. (Before the 1968 merger of Methodist denominations, the church was called Brown’s Methodist Episcopal Church.) Johnson said, “Our grandmother and grandfather, and our parents too. I mean everybody went. That was the church.” There are references in the historical record to a church near Parkers Creek as early as 1877. An 1884 deed names the trustees for the “Methodist Episcopal Church . . . for Parkers Creek,” suggesting that the name Brown’s came later, perhaps when the still-standing chapel was constructed, a building that served as a community center as well as a site for worship for many decades.

In the 1950s, however, attendance dwindled, and Brown’s finally closed in 1972. No doubt there were many reasons for this change but, in our interview, Delois Johnson pinpointed one important influence: the arrival of a charismatic minister who established the Greater Bible Way Church on Sixes Road, a short distance to the west.

Bishop Henry H. Brown came to Calvert County from the “mother” Bible Way Church in Washington, D.C. His message and ministerial style, together with an exciting form of gospel music, drew several families away from Brown’s Church. One of Bible Way’s founding trustees was Dawkins and Johnson’s uncle, Winsco “Dickie” Wallace.

The sisters are still active members of Bible Way. “Methodist religion is different from Pentecostal,” Johnson said. “They call it Holiness, Apostolic. I mean, the message is what drew people from the Methodist faith to the Pentecostal. But all of our grandfathers, grandmothers, you know, my great-grandparents, aunts, and uncles are buried at Brown’s Church.”

While Johnson and Dawkins were sharing their stories, they were also dealing with sadness from a recent loss. Their mother, Helen Mae, had passed away just six months earlier. They praised her hard work and determination. The sisters were extremely happy that she had kept her home on Scientists Cliffs Road. The sisters are determined to do everything within their power to hold onto the property and to keep it in good condition for the next generation.

Land Ownership

Johnson and Dawkins also recalled their elders’ decisions to sell parts of the land over the years, the most recent of which was the 1993 sale of 49 acres to the ACLT. “And when I look back now,” Johnson said, reflecting on the sales, “because we’re the old people now, but we were still old enough to have tried to convince them. . . . If we had been involved, possibly we could still have that property. That’s right.”

Memories at Warrior's Rest

Happier memories, however, predominated in the interview. As youngsters, the sisters and their siblings enjoyed playing and swimming at the beach at Warrior’s Rest. Dr. Page Jett owned the property at the time, and he let the children have fun in the water. Johnson commented, “All the boys could swim, not one girl could swim.” Dawkins chimed in, saying, “Tell them why.” With a big smile, Johnson said, “Why? Because we would go to the Bay and the boys would take us and throw us down in the water, so we became fearful of the water and never learned to swim. . . . That was a lot of girls that grew up in the neighborhood and none of us can swim, not to this day, (laughs), we can’t swim.”

Johnson said it has been at least 50 years since their last visit to Warrior’s Rest, now owned by the State of Maryland Department of Natural Resources and managed by ACLT. ACLT staff and volunteers are arranging a September visit by the sisters and other relatives, a return to their childhood playground on the Bay. And there will be an opportunity to visit their great-grandparent’s homeplace, owned by members of the Commodore family from 1898 until 1947, when it was bought and incorporated into Warrior’s Rest.

Conclusion

The interview ended on an upbeat note. Johnson said, “I wouldn’t trade my life, you know, all of the things I had to deal with all my life. I love saying this, over my seventy-two years, I wouldn’t, really, I wouldn’t trade it — I wouldn’t trade anything. . . . we had all — we were happy. Our parents taught us well. I mean, if we strayed it’s not because they didn’t teach us the right way, because they did.”

And we respond in kind, wishing Delois Harrod Johnson and Phyllis Harrod Dawkins a perfect day for the visit to Warrior’s Rest — sunny, memorable, joyous, and special. We thank you for letting us interview you and share your words with a wider audience!

We also invite anyone who would like to be interviewed to call Darlene Harrod at 410-535-6266.

Segments of Oral History Video

2024 Blitz was Bigger than Ever

April 16, 2024 By Community Relations Manager

By Mary Hoover, SMCA Coordinator

It was a mild and sunny April morning at the American Chestnut Land Trust (ACLT). Excitement and anticipation permeated the crowd of 30 volunteers, as Dr. Walter Boynton, a retired estuary ecologist from the Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, gave his yearly monologue and demonstrated proper water sampling techniques. Those gathered would shortly hike or drive to sites throughout Parkers Creek, Fishing Creek, St Leonard Creek, and Battle Creek to collect water samples for nitrate (NO23) analysis. This scene, however, conveyed only a fraction of the efforts happening throughout Southern Maryland. In all five counties, volunteers were preparing to traverse streams in the spirit of citizen science, with a record 128 sampling sites awaiting their attention. The 2024 Water Quality Blitz was underway.

Organized by the Southern Maryland Conservation Alliance (SMCA), the Water Quality Blitz is an annual citizen science initiative focused on sampling nitrogen levels in streams. Nitrogen, one of the primary pollutants in the Chesapeake Bay and the Patuxent River, is a key nutrient to manage. Fortunately, it is also a relatively easy nutrient to monitor. Research indicates that conducting spring sampling for nitrogen once a year yields accurate estimations of average yearly nitrogen in streams (Weller & Jordan, 2020). This method allows for the substitution of multiple yearly samples with a single, comprehensive sample, offering a cost-effective and time-efficient approach to nitrogen monitoring, particularly suited for non-profit organizations like those affiliated with SMCA.

The Blitz began in 2017 as a local effort by ACLT for the Parkers Creek watershed. As ACLT began to establish friends groups in other watersheds, however, the Blitz expanded to include sites in these other watersheds. In 2023, the Blitz became a regional effort, with the participation of groups from the newly-formed Southern Maryland Conservation Alliance, with sites in four out of the five Southern Maryland counties. In 2024, the Blitz reached new heights with participation from all five counties, namely Anne Arundel, Prince George’s, Charles, Calvert, and St. Mary’s. With a remarkable 128 sampling sites (right)—a significant increase from the previous year’s 95 sites—the 2024 Blitz underscored SMCA’s collective commitment to environmental stewardship and science-based action.

The 2024 Blitz expansion came at a highly opportune time in the history of Chesapeake Bay. Despite decades of clean up efforts guided by the Chesapeake Bay Program, progress has fallen short of expectations. In May 2023, a group of scientists known as the Scientific Technical Advisory Committee (STAC) addressed the shortcomings of the Program in a report titled “Achieving Water Quality Goals in the Chesapeake Bay: A Comprehensive Evaluation of System Response” (CESR). One of the most notable of the report’s recommendations was the call to emphasize restoration in shallow waters of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed in addition to the deep channels (Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC), 2023). This emphasis on shallow waters echoes the goals of SMCA’s annual water quality blitz, which targets shallow, non-tidal streams and smaller tributaries of the watershed.

A science-driven approach to restoration and a strategic focus on shallow waters stand as pillars in both Chesapeake Bay restoration and the Water Quality Blitz. Additionally, SMCA recognizes a vital third element necessary to achieving Bay cleanup goals: citizen involvement. Bay restoration is an immense task that governments neither can nor should tackle alone; it requires the active participation of communities. Citizens of watersheds not only possess local knowledge and personal stake in environmental protection, but they also provide essential boots on the ground to monitor streams. The monumental feat of sampling 128 sites during the 2024 Blitz would not have been possible without the aid of over 50 local volunteers trekking through Southern Maryland streams and meticulously filtering samples. For this reason, we extend our gratitude to those who generously volunteered their time to this important endeavor. Our volunteers’ enthusiasm for the Bay and their commitment to citizen science serve as much-needed inspiration amidst news of Bay Program shortcomings and overall climate fatigue. In mobilizing communities around citizen science, the Blitz continuously reminds us that the Chesapeake Bay is not beyond saving. Each year offers reassurance that the grit and optimism of local citizens remain buoyant forces, propelling us toward a brighter future for the Bay.

References:

Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC). (2023). Achieving water quality goals in the
Chesapeake Bay: A comprehensive evaluation of system response (K. Stephenson & D. Wardrop,
Eds.). STAC Publication Number 23-006, Chesapeake Bay Program Scientific and Technical
Advisory Committee (STAC), Edgewater, MD. 129

Weller, D. E., and T. E. Jordan. 2020. Inexpensive spot sampling provides unexpectedly effective indicators of watershed nitrogen status. Ecosphere 11(8):e03224. 10.1002/ecs2.3224

Weller, D. E., and T. E. Jordan. 2020. Inexpensive spot sampling provides unexpectedly effective indicators of
watershed nitrogen status. Ecosphere 11(8):e03224. 10.1002/ecs2.3224

Weller, D. E., and T. E. Jordan. 2020. Inexpensive spot sampling provides unexpectedly effective indicators of
watershed nitrogen status. Ecosphere 11(8):e03224. 10.1002/ecs2.3224W

Public Comment Period Open for Southern Maryland Woodlands National Wildlife Refuge

March 8, 2024 By Community Relations Manager

By Mary Hoover, Southern Maryland Conservation Alliance Coordinator

On March 8, 2024, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) released to the public a draft Land Protection Plan/Environmental Assessment for establishing the Southern Maryland Woodlands National Wildlife Refuge, kickstarting a 45-day comment period. This release comes almost a year after the last of three public listening sessions was held at the Calvert Marine Museum in Solomons. A year ago, the Service asked the public to provide feedback on the broad specs of the plan, and the response was overwhelmingly positive (see previous blog post here). Now, the Service welcomes public comments on the full draft plan, minutiae and all.

The draft plan and acquisition boundary underwent several iterations before they were approved by the USFWS regional leadership. This time last year, the Service proposed a maximum size of 30,000 acres for the new refuge. As it stands now, the plan proposes the protection of up to 40,000 acres across a 577,420-acre acquisition boundary and over a 30-year timeframe. Although the potential refuge size has increased, the same basic rules apply, notably landowners within the acquisition boundary maintain no obligation to sell or donate interests in their land. The plan, however, presents an opportunity for those who wish to sell or donate interest in their land to do so for a worthy cause.

It is no surprise that the rollout of the Southern Maryland Woodlands National Wildlife Refuge comes in the wake of newly established, large-scale conservation goals, namely President Biden’s “30×30 initiative” and the Maryland General Assembly’s goal to conserve 40% of the state’s lands by 2040. The draft plan cites these goals in the section titled “Purpose and Need for Action,” and the proposed 40,000 acres of wildlife refuge will be a major boost to both of these goals.

Doing some simple math, we can see just how significant this plan will be for large-scale conservation goals. According to the Maryland Geological Survey, there are approximately 1,243,347 acres of land in the five counties of Southern Maryland. Using data from the Maryland Protected Lands Dashboard, we can calculate that 287,093 acres are already conserved in Southern Maryland, putting the region’s land at 23% protected. The 40,000 acres proposed by this plan would alone cover an additional 3.2% of Southern Maryland’s land. The current percentage (23%) plus the completed refuge percentage (3.2%) would bring Southern Maryland to 26.2% conserved land, not counting all the lands that will be conserved through other means, such as Rural Legacy, recorded open space, forest conservation easements, etc. The imminent refuge funds, on top of all other available resources for land conservation, will greatly propel Southern Maryland toward both 30% and subsequently 40% conservation over the next couple of decades.

More important than numbers, however, are the impacts this plan will have on the innumerable migratory birds, waterfowl, endangered species, and people that occupy this special region. Without protections in place, Southern Maryland’s natural lands are vulnerable to destruction via development, which, however well-intentioned, could destroy the quality of life for those who call this region home, whether they be people, plants, or wildlife. The value of the refuge plan is that it maps out which areas are most critical for wildlife conservation while also establishing a means for protecting these critical areas, and for this reason, we hope you are as excited about this opportunity as we are. If so, please consider taking some time to look over the draft plan (accessible here) and submit any comments or questions to fw5southernmarylandplan@fws.gov.