A presentation given by:
David Gill – UMBC
Jennifer Hoffman – Salisbury University
Laura Thierer – McDaniel College
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 3
1.0 Introduction 4
2.0 Statement of the Problem 7
3.0 The Continuing Issue of Maritime Security 8
4.0 Alternatives 9
5.0 Maryland Water Watch 21
6.0 Works Cited 22
Keeping Maryland’s waterways secure is important because security efforts will not only
protect lives, but such efforts will also protect our economy. Transportation
infrastructures that run along Maryland’s waterways such as the Chesapeake Bay Bridge,
the Fort McHenry Tunnel, and the Port of Baltimore and are vital to the State’s economy
as well as the. According to the United States Government Accountability Office, “a
successful attack on a seaport [such as the Port of Baltimore] could result in a dramatic
slowdown in the supply system, with consequences in the billions of dollars.” Since
Maryland has more extensive waterways then most states, the State needs to devote
special attention to securing its waterways.
While the security of Maryland’s waterways has improved greatly since September 11th,
security efforts are still less than ideal. Millions of dollars have been spent improving
security at the Port of Baltimore, and the U.S. Coast Guard is engaging in a national
public awareness campaign to encourage boaters to watch for and report suspicious
activity. The possible cost of an attack is severe enough to warrant taking additional
proactive security measures.
To determine what additional proactive measures Maryland could take to secure its
waterways from terrorist attacks.
Rather than allocating additional funds to reform programs that are currently in place to
protect Maryland’s waterways, we recommend:
Creation of a new water security program specific to Maryland titled
Basing the program on a mandatory volunteer system via recreational boating
instructors and students.
Making the boating public more aware of suspicious activity in Maryland’s
Since the September 11th terrorist attacks, the United States government had to
reorganize its Homeland Security program to better protect its citizens. Even though
there was extensive attention on airport security, there was also a need to focus on other
potential terrorist targets, such as America’s ports and waterways. Since September 11th,
Maryland has been proud of how far it has come in a few short years to better protect its
seaports against terrorists and terrorist weapons. Maryland has been able to accomplish a
great deal by working together with local agencies, the private sector, and federal
agencies. It is important that the Maryland government continues its work here with
Governor Ehrlich and the Maryland Congressional delegation to ensure that the Port of
Baltimore and other Maryland waterways have the latest detection technology to protect
this state, its citizens, and its economy from any terrorist attack on one of our nation’s
most important seaports.
Ports are inherently vulnerable to terrorist attacks because of their size, generally
open accessibility by water and land, location in metropolitan areas, the amount of
material being transported through ports, and the ready transportation links to many
locations within our borders. The nation faces a difficult task in providing effective
security across the nation’s port system, and while progress is being made, an effective
port security environment may be many years away. Although some ports have
developed in such a way that security can be tightened relatively easily, many ports are
extensive in size and have dispersed enterprises intertwined with such security concerns
as public roadways and bridges, large petrochemical storage facilities, unguarded access
points, and a need for ready access on the part of thousands of workers and customers.
The Port of Baltimore illustrates many of these same kinds of vulnerabilities, and its
proximity to downtown and to other sensitive installations is another reason for concern.
While broad popular support exists for greater safety, this task is a difficult one because
the nation relies heavily on a free and expeditious flow of goods. To the extent that better
security impinges on this economic vitality, it represents a real cost to the system.
In August of 2004, Maryland Transportation Authority Police arrested terrorist
suspect Ismail Selim Elbarasse after making videotape with close up footage of the
Chesapeake Bay Bridge. Court papers say the video contains “reconnaissance and
surveillance” footage for a possible terrorist attack on the bridge. While it is unclear if
there were plans for an actual attack on the bridge, the suspicious tape made by Elbarasse
is evidence that Maryland’s waterways could be a target for terrorist attacks. An attorney
for Elbarasse said that he and his family were merely on a vacation to the beach.
However, Elbarasse’s position as an official in the Islamist terrorist organization, Hamas,
lends credibility to the idea that the videotape was intelligence-gathering for a possible
terrorist attack (Samuel).
Stephen Flynn, Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Council on
Foreign Relations, has stated that “maritime transportation is one of our nation’s most
serious vulnerabilities, and we are simply not doing enough to respond to the terrorist
threat to this critical sector” (Flynn). Flynn’s statement applies nationally, but this paper
will focus on Maryland’s maritime security. The arrest of Elbarasse and other maritime
security efforts that will be outlined in the paper are evidence that Maryland has paid
some attention to maritime security. However, the issue of maritime security is so
important that it is a worthwhile endeavor to search for ways to expand on security
efforts already in place.
Keeping Maryland’s waterways secure is important because security efforts will
not only protect lives, such efforts will also protect our economy. The Bay Bridge is one
area along Maryland’s waterways that is vital to the state economy. In fiscal year 2004,
approximately 25.8 million vehicles traveled over the bridge (Maryland Transportation
Authority). Almost every trip over the bridge impacts the state’s economy whether it is a
person commuting to work, going to the beach, or a commercial trucker. The Port of
Baltimore is another vital part of the state’s economy. According to the United States
Government Accountability Office, “a successful attack on a seaport [such as the Port of
Baltimore] could result in a dramatic slowdown in the supply system, with consequences
in the billions of dollars” (GAO – Maritime Security 3). As such Maryland needs to
devote special attention to securing its waterways.
The Port of Baltimore is also one of our country’s most important seaports. Close
to 140,000 cargo containers arrive here at the port each year. The Maryland state
government needs to ensure that the Port of Baltimore has the manpower and technology
it needs to protect this port and keep the citizens of Maryland – and the citizens of the
greater Washington-Baltimore area – as safe and secure as possible. Customs and Border
Protection has a team of nearly 150 employees working in the Port of Baltimore. Most of
them are CBP Officers. These men and women in the CBP Officer uniforms help protect
this port, Maryland, and our country every day, day in and day out. They are America’s
2.0 Past Maritime Security Efforts
Commandant of the Coast Guard, Admiral Thomas H. Collins, has stated in the
realm of maritime security, “we simply cannot afford to just respond to emergencies. We
must prevent them” (Collins 10). Prior to 9/11 America’s approach to combating
terrorism was largely response-based and reactive. The attacks of September 11th show
that a solely reactive approach is not acceptable because a successful terrorist attack on
Maryland’s waterways could have terrible costs in human terms and in economic terms.
In March of 2005, Admiral Collins announced the creation of the America’s
Waterway Watch (AWW) program to enhance the security of America’s waterways
(Coast Guard – Office of Public Affairs). This program simply asks those who spend
time along and by America’s waterways to report suspicious activity (America’s
Waterway Watch). Suspicious activity is reported through a hotline number to the
National Response Center (America’s Waterway Watch). The Center then contacts the
Coast Guard or if appropriate another government agency to respond (America’s
The Baltimore Sun ran an article on a Maryland Port Administration report that
highlighted security enhancements made to the Port of Baltimore since 9/11. Over four
million dollars of improvements have been made to the lighting and perimeter security at
the Dundalk Marine Terminal. More than 1.3 million dollars in security enhancements
have been added to the Baltimore World Trade Center. Perimeter fencing was added to
North and South Locust Point at a cost of $100,000. Additionally, several future port
security projects are in the works. These projects include the purchase of another patrol
boat, explosives detection equipment, surveillance equipment, and access controls
The U.S. Government Accountability Office testified before the U.S. Senate in
May of 2005 stating, “federal agencies and local stakeholders have taken many actions to
secure seaports” (GAO – Maritime Security 2). However, the GAO also made clear that
more work needs to be done in port security (GAO – Maritime Security 2). This
assessment that progress has been made, but more work needs to be done is echoed
locally at the Port of Baltimore by state officials. Maryland Deputy Secretary of
Transportation Jim Ports stated that the port is “much more secure than it was before
9/11,” but conceded that more work remains to be done (Dresser).
3.0 The Continuing Issue of Maritime Security
The Coast Guard estimated after 9/11 that 5.6 billion dollars would be required to
minimally secure America’s ports (Flynn). Only 516 million dollars has been
appropriated by the federal government for port security (Flynn). Furthermore, homeland
security money has been largely allocated to states in a manner that is roughly equal per
capita rather then based on risk of attack.
The Coast Guard, an agency only slightly larger than the New York City Police
Department, is charged with protected America’s 95,000 miles of shoreline and over 3
million square miles of waters that are adjacent to U.S. maritime borders (Flynn). The
America’s Waterway Watch program is only able to devote very limited resources to
Maryland. Clearly, Maryland cannot rely on the federal government alone to secure its
Maryland does assist the federal government with maritime security by
implementing security technology and with police forces. As mentioned above,
Maryland has completed a number of port security projects such as enhanced lighting and
perimeter security. The Maryland Transportation Authority Police patrol high-risk areas
such as the Port of Baltimore and toll bridges and tunnels (Maryland Transportation
Authority Police). Additionally, the Maryland Natural Resources Police patrol
Maryland’s waterways (Maryland Natural Resources Police).
However, most maritime security efforts have focused on port security. While the
Port of Baltimore is certainly an important asset that is worthy of protection; too little
attention has been focused on securing Maryland’s waterways in general. Maryland has
4,400 hundred miles of coastline that are frequented by recreational and commercial
boaters <cite>. Additionally many millions of people travel on Maryland’s bridges and
tunnels each year. These areas are patrolled by police, but unfortunately police cannot be
everywhere along Maryland’s waterways at the same time.
A successful terrorist attack could have a variety of serious consequences.
Thousands of lives could be lost. If a bridge or other transportation asset were destroyed
than some Marylanders would find it very difficult to get to their jobs or other important
places. Further, an attack would always remain a painful memory to those who survived
the attack and their neighbors. Even though a terrorist attack using Maryland’s waterways
is not likely, the possible cost of an attack is severe enough to warrant taking additional
proactive security measures.
4.1 Improving the Coast Guard
Coast Guard Port Security Units (PSUs) are Coast Guard units staffed primarily
with selected reservists. They provide waterborne and limited land-based protection for
shipping and critical port facilities both INCONUS and in theater.
PSUs can deploy within 24 hours and establish operations within 96 hours after
initial call-up. Each PSU has transportable boats equipped with dual outboard motors,
and support equipment to ensure mobility and sustainability for up to 30 days. Every
PSU is staffed by a combination of reserve and active duty personnel. PSUs require
specialized training not available elsewhere in the Coast Guard. Coast Guard Reservists
assigned to Port Security Units must complete a 2 week Basic Skills Course at the PSU
Training Detachment in Camp LeJeune, NC.
In addition to their most recent support of homeland security operations around
the country, PSUs were deployed to the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm in
1990. They also served in Haiti during Operation Uphold Democracy in 1994. In
December 2000, PSU 309 from Port Clinton, OH was deployed to the Middle East to
provide vital force protection for the Navy assets following the attack on the USS Cole.
For more than 210 years, the Coast Guard has served the nation as one of the five armed
forces. Throughout its distinguished history, the Coast Guard has enjoyed a unique
relationship with the Navy. By statute, the Coast Guard is an armed force, operating in
the joint arena at any time and functioning as a specialized service under the Navy in time
of war or when directed by the President. It also has command responsibilities for the
U.S. Maritime Defense Zone, countering potential threats to American's coasts, ports, and
inland waterways through numerous port-security, harbor-defense, and coastal-warfare
operations and exercises.
Today, U.S. national security interests can no longer be defined solely in terms of
direct military threats to America and its allies. With the terrorist attacks on September
11, 2001, the U.S. has fully realized the threat faced on the home front from highly
sophisticated and covert adversarial groups. The Coast Guard has assumed one of the
lead roles in responding to these unscrupulous attacks upon our nation by providing
homeland security in our nation’s harbors, ports and along our coastlines. Commercial,
tanker, passenger, and merchant vessels have all been subject to increased security
measures enforced by the Coast Guard.
In the immediate days after the destruction of the World Trade Centers and
Pentagon, over 2,600 reservists were recalled to provide operational and administrative
support. Reservists and active duty Coast Guard members worked in unison to provide
additional manpower to clean-up efforts in New York City and heightened port security
in the ports of Seattle, Los Angeles, New York and Boston to include the implementation
of “sea marshals.” As the nation re-defines national security and government leaders
organize the Homeland Security Council, the Coast Guard will continue its efforts to
reduce the risk from terrorism to commercial and passenger vessels traversing U.S.
waterways and designated waterfront facilities.
The Coast Guard's national defense role to support U.S. military commanders-in-
chiefs (CINCs) is more explicitly outlined in a memorandum of agreement signed by the
Secretaries of Defense and Transportation in 1995. Four major national-defense missions
were assigned to the Coast Guard. These missions--maritime intercept operations,
deployed port operations/security and defense, peacetime engagement, and environmental
defense operations--are essential military tasks assigned to the Coast Guard as a
component of joint and combined forces in peacetime, crisis, and war.
In recent years, the nation's CINCs have requested--and have been provided--
Coast Guard cutters to conduct maritime-intercept operations, carry out peacetime-
engagement missions, and perform other essential warfare tasks for all three forward-
deployed Navy fleets: the Fifth Fleet in the Arabian Gulf/Middle East; the Sixth Fleet in
the Mediterranean; and the Seventh Fleet in the Western Pacific. In addition, Coast Guard
cutters have recently supported NATO operations during the Kosovo crisis. However, the
Coast Guard deepwater fleet is aging and in urgent need of replacement.
The U.S. Coast Guard's physical assets (cutters, aircraft, and shore facilities) have
been undercapitalized for years. Only two of the 39 countries throughout the world with
similarly sized navies or coast guards have an older physical plant. To remedy the
situation the Coast Guard has initiated the Deepwater Capabilities Replacement Project.
Instead of proposing a traditional one-for-one asset-replacement program, the Coast
Guard is working with industry to develop a system of systems in an effort to ensure
effective--and cost-effective--interoperability among all of its Deepwater assets and with
the other four armed services. The eventual Integrated Deepwater System (IDS) will
encompass all of the Coast Guard's major cutters, aircraft, and sensors, providing the
capabilities required to perform all of the Coast Guard's essential deepwater missions.
IDS procurement is designed to achieve maximum operational effectiveness at minimum
total ownership costs.
Outside of U.S. coastal waters, the Coast Guard assists foreign naval and
maritime forces through training and joint operations. Many of the world’s maritime
nations have forces that operate principally in the littoral seas and conduct missions that
resemble those of the Coast Guard. And, because it has such a varied mix of assets and
missions, the Coast Guard is a powerful role model that is in ever-increasing demand
abroad. The service’s close working relations with these nations not only improve
mutual cooperation during specific joint operations in which the Coast Guard is involved
but also support U.S. diplomatic efforts in general: promoting democracy, economic
prosperity, and trust between nations.
Although the Coast Guard is one of the nation’s highly revered maritime forces,
there are improvements that can be made within the organization to better protect
waterways at the state level. One of the flaws in having the Coast Guard secure local
waterways is that the organization must be spread out among a variety of areas. The
Coast Guard is responsible for securing waterways internationally as well as
domestically, which demands that the organization focus on a multitude of security
issues. Spreading American ideals, such as democracy, is also one of the Coast Guard’s
duties. In order to protect Maryland waterways, there must be more of a focus on local
One alternative to addressing the issue of securing Maryland’s waterways and
ports is to make improvements within the Coast Guard. Possibly creating individual
sectors of the Coast Guard to address state concerns would help to deter terrorist activity.
Maryland’s waterways could also benefit from the Coast Guard becoming more involved
with the community. Though the Coast Guard does retain a volunteer program, the Coast
Guard Auxiliary, it requires that volunteers must meet certain physical training
requirements. By allowing all those who are interested to join a volunteer program, the
Coast Guard would be able to acquire many more volunteers. Reaching out to the
community would also be an improvement that could help the Coast Guard to involve
people in maritime security issues. Getting the message out to the public as to what is
suspicious activity and how it would one should go about reporting it would be a
beneficial project that the Coast Guard could establish.
4.2 Improving the Maryland Natural Resource Police
The Maryland Natural Resources Police (NRP) is an enforcement arm of the
Department of Natural Resources. With an authorized strength of 214 officers and a
dedicated staff of civilian and volunteer personnel, the Natural Resources Police provide
a variety of services in addition to conservation and boating law enforcement duties
throughout the State of Maryland. These services include search and rescue, emergency
medical services, education, information and communications services on a round the
The basic structure of the NRP includes Field Operations, Support Services and
Administrative Services. In simplest terms, Field Operations is directly responsible for
the main on-line law enforcement activity, including aviation support. Support Services
provides records, communications, training/education, technical, maintenance and
investigative support, while Administrative Services is responsible for personnel and
fiscal support, and the Abandoned Boat Program and the State Vessel.
Enforce all natural resources laws of the State including all rules and
regulations adopted pursuant to the Natural Resources Article. Assist in the
protection of life and property and serve as the primary search and rescue agency
on the waters and in the rural areas of the State. Preserve the peace, assist in the
prevention of crime, detect and apprehend violators, safeguard individual rights
and perform miscellaneous service functions as requested by the citizenry.
All Natural Resources Police officers are vested with all powers conferred
upon police officers of the State, and may exercise these powers anywhere within
The Maryland Natural Resources Police Reserve Officer Program is
comprised of volunteers who have dedicated themselves to inspire people to enjoy
and live in harmony with their environment, and to protect what makes Maryland
unique -- our treasured Chesapeake Bay, our diverse landscape our living and
natural resources. The Reserve Officers are committed to performing non-law
enforcement duties that would otherwise have been performed by commissioned
police officers. This complementary effort enhances the Natural Resources Police
ability to Preserve and Protect Maryland's natural resources.
The NRP is effective in protecting Maryland’s waterways, but the
department could benefit from improvements. The NRP could take more of a
proactive approach in securing waterways. The police generally are utilized as a
reactive resource more so than a preemptive tool. Although NRP is able to
prohibit terrorist activity by simply being present in Maryland’s waterways, much
like the Coast Guard, the police must divide their attention among a variety of
occurrences on the water. NRP is responsible for search and rescue missions,
though a vital and critical task, it diverts the focus away from prohibiting
suspicious activity. A possible solution to this problem would be to create a
special task force that solely monitors the waters and ports for suspicious activity.
This unit would spend their time only on matters regarding suspicious activity in
the water. There also needs to be an effort made to involve the boating
community with this endeavor to combat terrorism. The NRP could incorporate a
suspicious activity training seminar in their boater courses. One of the NRP’s
responsibilities is to educate the public through boater courses. During these
courses, the police could take the time to focus on training potential boaters as to
what to do when reporting suspicious activity and how to disseminate this to the
average recreational boater. These adjustments to the Natural Resources Police
are alternatives that could potentially deter terrorist activities.
4.3 Improving America’s Waterway Watch
America's Waterway Watch is a national awareness program that asks those who
work, live, or recreate on or near the water to be aware of suspicious activity that might
indicate threats to our country's homeland security.
Americans are urged to adopt a heightened sensitivity toward unusual events or
individuals they may encounter in or around ports, docks, marinas, riversides, beaches, or
Anyone observing suspicious activity is simply asked to note details and contact local
law enforcement. The program also urges people not to approach or challenge anyone
acting in a suspicious manner.
This program is a strong attempt to make citizens more aware of suspicious
activity, thus prohibiting terrorism from making it to America’s ports. However,
America’s Waterway Watch does not provide training courses for those audiences
they are asking to be more aware. The implementation of a suspicious activity
training course would be an alternative to improving the nation’s, and ultimately
Maryland’s, waterways. Designing a special task force to pay more attention to
those states with vital waterways would be another improvement that would
benefit Maryland. The program also needs to make more of an effort to reach out
to the community. Having a distinct plan of how to educate and involve those
who are concerned with the waterways will help to better carry out this
4.4 Implementing a New Program: Maryland’s Waterwatch
Rather than improving already existing programs, one final alternative to securing
Maryland’s waterways and to make the public more aware of suspicious activity would
be to create an entirely new program. This program would be named Maryland’s
Waterwatch and would be modeled from America’s Waterway Watch. This program
would be based upon a volunteer system, which would cost the State very little money.
There would be one main captain, who would receive extensive training from a variety of
security organizations, such as Homeland Security and the Coast Guard, and would be
paid. In order to guarantee that there would be volunteers, all those who wish to teach in
a boater licensing course would have to be trained to be aware of suspicious activity in
the water. These instructors would then take their students, those who wish to receive a
boater’s license, onto Maryland’s waters and observe Maryland waterways for suspicious
activity. These observations would serve as hours towards completing the classes.
Making these observations mandatory to teach or complete a boater licensing course
would help to spread the word about suspicious activity on Maryland’s waters, guarantee
that the waterways are actually being monitored, and would save the State money since
only one captain would need to be paid.
5.0 Maryland Waterwatch
Maryland Waterwatch is a new program generated to enhance communication
between the state and its citizens concerning the prevention of terrorist attacks on
Maryland’s waterways. The program will educate boaters and marinas most familiar
with local waters to look for and report suspicious activity. This program will create a
statewide outreach course to educate marina operators, owners, and recreational boaters
as to ways they can get involved in the security initiative. Maryland Waterwatch will
help to assist the federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies by being ever vigilant
in recognizing possible threats and crimes on and around our waterways. Therefore, it
will make a tremendous headway in improving the safety and awareness of what goes on
in Maryland’s waterways.
The Chesapeake Bay will be divided into 5-7 different sectors with a Program
Director who supervises the whole program, a captain, and volunteers. The Program
Director/Coordinator is the only paid position in the program, due to limited funding.
This staff member will oversee all of the sectors, and work on strategies to recruit
volunteers for the program. The director will also act as a liaison between Maryland’s
state government and the volunteers in the program to update them on security issues in
the waterways. Also, there will be assigned captains in each sector. Serving as a captain
is a volunteer position, but is a very valuable position in this program. Captains will help
with safety and security training on the water and supervise the volunteers patrolling in
the area. Qualified captains will also teach basic boating safety and seamanship skills to
the general boating volunteers. The volunteers will consist of recreational boaters or
anyone else who wants to be an extra pair of eyes out on the water and report and kind of
Since Maryland Waterwatch is a program in the making, a new hotline number
will not be included in the plan. Instead, volunteers will call the recently new
Chesapeake Bay Safety and Environmental Hotline at 1-877-224-R-BAY. It is a toll-free
number for Maryland citizens to call and report a problem on the Chesapeake Bay, as
well as the Coastal Bays. One phone call will direct citizens to the appropriate agency to
make a report 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. When a volunteer calls this hotline, he will
automatically enter a phone directory and choose to report suspicious activity, which will
then transfer him to the TIPS hotline where the state police will take down the reported
information, analyze it, and then deem as appropriate.
Now, some might ask, “Aren’t there already other programs or agencies
protecting Maryland’s waterways?” The answer is yes, but this new program is trying to
be implemented so it can improve the other agencies and simply work together to keep
the waterways safe. For example, America’s Waterway Watch (AWW) is a public
outreach program run by the U.S. Coastguard and the Department of Homeland Security.
It is a nationwide initiative similar to the well-known and successful Neighborhood
Watch program that asks community members to report suspicious activities to local law
enforcement agencies. However, unlike the new program Maryland’s Waterwatch, you
are not formally joining an organization; there are no meetings, membership cards or
membership requirements, and you do not become an agent of the Coast Guard or any
other law enforcement agency. AWW only offers a hotline number. To report suspicious
activity while out on the water, AWW advises boaters to call the National Response
Center at 800-424-8802 or 877-24WATCH. Brochures and posters are handed out to
promote this number. Maryland Waterwatch can expand on AWW’s course of action
because the new program requires assistance from volunteers who are specifically
monitoring the water.
Major stakeholders who work on a successful enhancement of seaport security
include the U.S. Coastguard, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, the Governor’s
Office of Homeland Security, Maryland Department of the Environment, and Maryland
Department of Transportation.
Items such as pamphlets, posters, pens, pencils, magnets, stickers, and key chains
could be used to promote Maryland Waterwatch. These items would inform and remind
Marylanders about the waterwatch program. Pamphlets and posters could provide
detailed information on the program, such as a list of signs of suspicious activity. Also,
pens, pencils, magnets, stickers, and key chains, could only provide basic information,
such as the hotline number and website, but people are less likely to discard these items.
More specifically, boaters could use a floatation key ring device with the toll-free number
on it as a reminder to report suspicious activity. Also, volunteers could hand out
weatherproof vinyl stickers for boats. All of this print literature will demonstrate
people’s support of this program and Homeland Security.
Seeking out citizens who use Maryland’s waterways and places frequented by
these people is another method of promoting the Maryland Waterwatch program. An
effort to personally reach out to recreational and commercial boaters, longshoremen,
marina operators, waterfront property owners, and others could yield a large group of
volunteers for the program. Advertising in marinas, boat and boat supply stores, boat
shows and races, and in boat-related publications would be an effective way to target
these groups. Additionally, program advocates could target these groups by attending
meetings of boating associations, waterfront community associations, unions, and other
1. America’s Waterway Watch. “America’s Waterway Watch Home Page.”
2. Baltimore Sun. “Projects at the Port.” Baltimore Sun. July 10, 2005.
3. Coast Guard – Office of Public Affairs. “Coast Guard launches America’s
Waterway Watch to encourage the reporting of suspicious activity.” U.S. Coast
Guard. March 3, 2005.
4. Collins, Thomas H. Speech on Coast Guard’s Maritime Security Efforts. National
Defense University Lecture Program. December 1, 2004.
5. Dresser, Michael and Greg Barrett. “Port Security Gaps Pose Threat.” Baltimore
Sun. July 10, 2005.
6. Flynn, Stephen. “The Ongoing Neglect of Maritime Security.” Written testimony
before the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of Representatives.
August 25, 2004.
7. Government Accountability Office. “Maritime Security – Enhancements Made,
But Implementation and Sustainability Remain Key Challenges.” Testimony
Before Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, U.S. Senate. May
8. Maryland Natural Resources Police. “Maryland Natural Resources Police”
9. Maryland Transportation Authority Police. “MdTA Police.” July 2005. July 2005.
10. Samuel, Peter. “Chesapeake Bay Bridge MD targeted by Islamic terrorists –
Hamas official held.” Toll Road News. August 25, 2004.