Full text of "Probable economic effects of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge on the Eastern Shore Counties of Maryland"

See other formats

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2009 with funding from

Lyrasis IVIembers and Sloan Foundation

http://www.archive.org/details/probableeconomic62mary

Maryland & Rare Book Room
University Of Maryland Librar-b
College Park. Md.

iryland

)lio

OF THE

CHESAPEAKE BAY BRIDGE

ON THE

EASTERN SHORE

MARYLAND STATE PLANNING COMMISSION

APRIL 1950

PROBABLE ECONOMIC EFFECTS

of the

CHESAPEAKE BAY BRIDGE

on the

EASTERN SHORE COUNTIES OF MARYLAND

►

MARYLAND STATE PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 1950

MARYLAND STATE PLANNING COfffllSSION
100 Equitable Building
Baltimore 2, Maryland

Publication No. 62 P^i^-^ 25 cents

MARYLMD STATE PLMUIIKG COMISSION

John E. F^xnk, Acting Chairman
Department of Public Improvements

Charles E, Brohavm

ifember from Eastern Shore

Joseph R, Byrnes

Legislative Council

E. Brooke Lee

Member from Western Maryland

Robert M, Reindollar

State Roads Commission

VJilliam L, Galvin Robert H. Riley

State Board of Public Felfare State Board of Health

Thomas B, Sjnnons
Member from Southern Maryland

I, Alvin Pasarew
Director

iLyi^

MARYLAND STATE PLANNING COMMISSION

100 Equitable Building
Baltimore 2, Maryland

CHARLES E. BROHAWN
JOSEPH R. BYRNES
WILLIAM L GALVIN
E. BROOKE LEE
- ROBERT M. REINDOLIAR-
ROBERT H. RILEY
THOMAS B. SYMONS

JOHN B. FUNK

Acting Chairman

I. Alvin Pasarew
Director

April 21, 1950

Mr, John B, Funk, Acting Chairman
Maryland State Planning Commission
100 Equitable Building
Baltimore 2, Maryland

Dear Mr. Funk:

I take pleasure in transmitting herewith a staff study
entitled "Probable Economic Effects of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge
on the Eastern Shore Counties of Maryland."

It is generally believed that the Chesapeake Bay has
long served as a barrier to both social and commercial relations
between the Eastern and Western sections of the State. The Bridge
will undoubtedly have far reaching effects in eliminating this
barrier, and in stimulating the economic prosperity not only of
the Eastern Shore but of the State as a whole.

Taking into consideration the economic pattern of the
Eastern Shore counties, we find that the most significant results
mill come from increased traffic on the highways of the Eastern
Shore by travelers using the Bridge as a link in the projected
system of highways from Maine to Florida; and from the expanded
vacation trade made possible by the saving of time which the
Bridge will afford.

These are the immediate effects that may be expected.
It is probable that the years to come will produce more wide-
spread results in other segments of the Eastern Shore's economy.

Very truly yours.

I. Alvin Pasarew
Director

ACKNCWIEDGMEMTS

The State Plannip^ Commissicn wuld li:<e +.0 take this opportunity
to extend its spaoial approciaticn to the ftilloving persona and agencies
T:ao gave their advice and assistance in the development of this repovt:
Mrs. Gladys N. M^Dermott, Labor Market Anal.^'st, Department of Enployicent
Security; Miss Sarah P. Carothers, Dii-ector of the Tourist Bureau, Baltimore;
Association of Gorimerce; Mr. George N. Lewis, Jr., Director of the Traffic
Division, State Roads Commission; Mr, Edward A. Rheb, Accountant, Retail
Sales Tax Division; Dr. Elwyn A. Mauck, Director, State Fiscal Research
Bureau; Mr, Edgar T. Bennett, Vice President and General Manager, Red Star
Motor Coaches, Inc., Salisbury, Maryland; Mr. Charles A. Horroworth, Exec-
utive Vice-President, American Hotel Association; Mr. E. F. Railsback,
Assistant General Manager, Delaware-Nev? Jersey Ferry Company, New Castle,
Delaware; and Mr. Russell E. Singor; Executive Vice-President, American
Automobile Association, This study was conduct ed by Mrs. Sybil A. Dinaburg,
Research Analyst, under the direction of I. Alvin Pasarew, Director, and
Mrs, Shirley F, TJeiss, Economist,

TABI.F OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION 1

CHAPTER I

LINKS ACROSS THE BAY 2

Early Bay Crossings o.c.... 2

Efforts to Build a Bridge Acrcss the Bay „ 3

Description of the Bridge 4

CHAPTER II

T5HAT IS THE EASTERN SHORE . . . , 6

The Geography of the Eastern Shore 6

Population '''

Per Capita Income .....c ...*....*«•. 9

Assessable Basis c.» • 10

Employment and Wages ....o H

CH.\PTER III

MAJOR INDUSTRIES . 12

Agriculture • • 12

Seafood U

Manufacturing «.• 14-

Retail Trade 19

CHAPTER IV

PROBABLE EFFF.CTS OF THE BAY BRIDGE ON THE MAJOR INDUSTRIES 22

Agriculture ..... 22

Seafood , 23

Manufacturing ...... 23

Retail Trade , 2^

CHAPTER V

VACATION CENTER 26

Description of Vacation Areas 26

Sandy Point State Park , 28

Employment and Income 29

CHAPTER VI

THE BAY BRIDGE AS A MAJOR LINK IN NORTH-SOUTH TRAFFIC 30

Present Highway Routes 30

Projected Highway Routes 3^

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTD.y

Page

CHAPTER VI (CONTD.)

Estimates of Expected Traffic . . . . „ » 34-

Effects on Land Values 36

Expected Income from Increased Traffic ....... 37

CHAPTER VII

THE BRIDGE AND ITS EFFECT ON THE VACATION TRADE AO

Distance and Traval Time to Shore ResortvS ............. 4-0

Estimates of Vaca&ion Traffic • 4.1

Income from Vacationers ...... 43

CHAPTER VIII

SUMMARY OF Fn^IDINGS c /+6

REFERENCES 4-8

TABLE OF CONTENTS (COKTD.)

Page
TABLES

1. Population on the Eastern Shore, 1790-194.9 8

2. Effective Buying Income on the Eastern Shore, 1943 9

3. Assessed Valuation of Property on the Eastern Shore,

1933 and 19-^8 10

4.. Norarjriculturr.:'^ Emplo^r-ont and Wages on the Eastern

Saore, Seconcl Quarter 1949 , -^ ,..,.....♦ 11

5. Gross Farm Income on the Eastern Shore, 194-0 and 1945 12

6. Va?u3 of Major Agricultural Products Raised on the

Ilastern Shore, 194-5 ,,.,,.,.,........ 13

7. Employment Distribution in tli3 Mamfacturing Industries on the

Eastern Shore, Second Quaroer 194-9 16

A. Total for Nine Counties 16

B. Caroline County . ..*.,..* l6

C. Cecil County ....<, 16

D. Dorchester County ....»......••• 17

E. Kent and Queen Anne's Counties ....*.«.* 17

F. Somerset County ....... • 17

G. Talbot County ....... 18

H, Wicomico County • • 18

I, Worcester County 18

8. Value of Retail Sales on the Eastern Shore, 1948 20

9. Employmeiit Distributicn in Retail Trade on the

Eastera Shore, Second Quai-ter 194-9 21

10, Average Toll Charges for Passenger Cars Between New York City

and Richmond, Virgirda, 1950 and 1952 36

11, Distance and Travel Time from Washington, D, C., and

Baltimore to Queenstown, Maryland ..«*•• 4-0

12, Monthly Traffic on the Chesapeake Bay Ferry System,

October 1947 to September 194-9 42

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CGirrD.)

Page

MAPS

Figure 1. Eastern Shore, Maryland 5

Figure 2, Present and Projected Highway Routes Between

New York City and Richmond, Virginia 31

INTRODUCTION

After almost 4,0 years of intermittent activity for a bridge across
the Chesapeake Bay, the State Legislature in 194.7, under the leadership of
Governor Lane, authorized construction of a Bay crossing. In 194-9 work •was
begun on the Chesapeake Bay Bridge, By the suirjner of 1952, the Bridge should
be a reality.

The Chesapeake Bay, stretching as it does, for 195 miles and varying
in width from three to 22 miles, has long separated the Marylanders of the
Eastern Shore from those across the water. It has been a major psychological
barrier and has been largely resporsible for the isolation of the Eastern
Shore from the rest of the State.

The Bridge, as noted editorially in The Sun,-' "promises to remake
the life of the State in many important respects »"

The chief effects of the Bridge will probably be felt in the nine
Maryland counties comprising the Eastern Shore.. It is in an attempt to
describe and, wherever possible, to measure the probable economic effects on
these Counties, that this study has been undertaken. The report describes
the links across •l.he Etiy leading ur to a-d including the Bridge; the general
economic background of the counties of the Eastern Shore; and the probable
effects of the Bridge on agricultural and industrial activity; as well as
those changes expected to result from increased highway traffic and
vacation trade.

1/ March 23, 1950.

CHAPTER I
LINKS ACROSS THE BAY

EARLY BAY CROSSINGS

From the earliest days of the region's history, freight and pas-
sengers have been carried across the Chesapeake Bay by boats of all kinds,
plying between the two shores of -what is now the State of Maryland. At the
time of the first Ttorld War, with the growth in automotive traffic, agitation
was begun for a regular ferry service to carry trucks, passenger vehicles,
and passengers across the Bay, In 1919 such service was established by the
Claiborne-Annapolis Ferry, Inc. moving between the two points named. At first,
service consisted of only two round trips daily, both summer and winter. As
the demands on the service increased, the schedules were expanded and ad-
ditional ferryboats were added to the line.

In 1930, a new terminal was established at Matapeake, on the Eastern
Shore, which thus reduced the water distance from about 23 miles to 8,7 miles.
This permitted more frequent service between the two shores. During the
Thirties, service between Annapolis and Claiborne was finally discontinued
and the number of ferryboats and scheduled trips to Matapeake were greatly
expanded.

Under the authority granted by Chapter 856 of the Acts of 194-lj
the State Roads Commission took over the property and the operation of the
Chesapeake Bay Ferry in 194.1. In Uovember 194-3, the western terminal of the
ferry was moved from the narrow streets of Annapolis to its present location
on Sandy Point, During the period of State operation, service has been
steadily improved by the addition of new and larger ferryboats, the increase
in the number of crossings, and the reduction of tolls, -'

1/ Coverdale and Colpitts, Report on Traffic and Revenues.. ProDQaad-
Chesapeake Bay Bridge. September 15, 394.8, pp,l/-6

EFFORTS TO BUILD A BRIDGE ACRCSS THE BAY

Even before the establishment of the Aiinapolis-Ciaiborne Ferry, Inc.,
a bridge across the Bay was advocated. In 1908, the first proposal for a
Chesapeake Bay Bridge was made. The recommendation then called for a bridge
across the Bay just north of Baltimore to join the cocununities on the Eastern
Shore nith the State's principal city.

Organized private efforts were made when the Merchants and Manufac-
turers Association, predecessor of the Baltimore Association of Commerce, ap-
propriated $1,000 in 1908, for an engineering survey.-' Further efforts were
made in 1926, when the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Company was organized to construct
a bridge across the Bay just north cf Baltimore between Miller Island and
Tolchester. Federal and State legislation authorizing construction of the
bridge was enacted in 1927. However, sufficient funds could not be raised
and in 1929 all efforts at construction with private funds were finally
abandoned.

Immediately thereafter, serious consideration was given to State
construction of a Bay Bridge. However the State, along with the rest of the
Nation was in the throes of the depression of the Thirties, and was therefore
in no position to consider the financing cf such a bridge. It was not until
1937 that the Maryland Legislature, under Chapter 356 of the Acts of 1937,
authorized the State Roads Commission to formulate a comprehensive plan for
the construction of bridges and tunnels, and to issue revenue bonds payable
solely from tolls, to cover the cost of such projects. It mas under this
authority that the State Roads Commission constructed the Susquehanna River
Bridge at Havre de Grace, and the Potomac River Bridge near Morgantown. It is
also under this enabling legislation and Chapter 561 of the Acts of 194-7 that
the Chesapeake Bay Bridge is now being constructed.

2/ Baltimore Magazine, November 194-8, p. 15.

DESCRIFTION OF THE BRIDGE

The Bay Bridge, to cost i'^41,000,000, mas begun in 194.9, and is sched-
uled for completion in 1952. It mill span the Chesapeake Bay from Sandy-Point
on the '..'estern Shore to a point near Stevensville, Kent Island, on the Eastern
Shore. The approaches to the Bridge mill connect mith State Highmay UOU on
both shores. It mill stretch for 7,11 miles, mith a distance of 4.3 miles
over mater. The hig-hmay mill be reinforced concrete, 28 feet mide between
curbs, which will afford sufficient width for two lanes of traffic traveling
at open highmay speeds.—'

1/ J, E, Greiner, Co., The Chesapeake Bay Bridge Engineering Report,
July 1, 1948, pp. 30-33.

FIGURE I

EASTERN SHORE
MARYLAND

WILMINGTON

APRIL 1950

MARYLAND STATE PLANNING COMMISSION

CHAPTER II
WHAT IS THE EASTERl^I SHORE

THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE EASTERN SHORE

The Eastern Shore is a major portion of the Delmarva Peninsula,
that section of the Middle Atlantic Region lying betusen the Chesapeake
Bay and the Atlantic Ocean and stretching for almost 200 miles from I'ilming-
ton, Delav;are, to Cape Charles, Vj.rginia. The Peninsula's width varies
from 60 miles at its widest to less than one mile at its southern tip.
Economically and geographically this section of the coast is a homogeneous
area, although politically it is made up of three states. It includes
the entire State of Delav;are, nine counties of Maryland, and two counties
of Virginia. This study is confined to the Eastern Shore which comprises
the nine Maryland counties, namely, Cecil, Kent, Queen Anne's, and Caroline,
to the llorth, and Talbot, Dorchester, Wicomico, Somerset, and Worcester,
to the South. (See Figure 1.)

The chief cities of the Eastern Shore include Salisbury in Wicomicf
County, with a 1949 population of 16,000, and second only to ^.filmington,
Delaware in its size; Cambridge in Dorchester Countj', v/ith a population of
12,500; Elkton in Cecil County, with 6,000 population; and Easton in Talbot
County, with a population of 4,800. These cities are all located on the
Eastern Shore's main highv;ay arteries and serve as important trading centers.
Ocean City, Maryland, and Rehobo-.h Peach, Delav/are, are popular oceanside
resorts, catering to visitors from all parts of the United States,

The land of the Eastern Shore is low, flat, and fertile. The
climate is mild, the soil easily vrorked. and the waters abundantly supplied
vfith a i.'ide variety of seafood. The area is governed by tradition in all
manner of things, including methods of farming and fishing, styles of
architecture and cooking, as well as social relations.

POPULATIOH

In 13L3 the population of the Eastern Shore vfas 210,600. The
largest counties, in terms of population, were llicomico uith 38,800, and
Cecil and Dorchester vdth 29,600 each. Together these counties comprised
almost 4.0 per cent of the nine-county total. (See Table 1.)

During the 1940' s the population of the nine counties increased
by almost 8 per cent. All the individual counties vritnessed increases.
IJicomico County witnessed the greatest relative growth, its population
rising by more than 12 per cent during the nine-year period. The other
counties experienced varying increases ranging from 12.1 per cent in Cecil
to 3»8 per cent in Talbot.

In 1790, this area supported a population of more than 107,000,
By 19/1.9, it had grovm to more than 210,000. The counties themselves have
grovm at varying rates. The largest relative grov/ths occurred in Cecil
and Wicomico counties which increased by 117 and 115 per cent respectively.
Only one county. Queen Anne's, remained approximately unchanged over this
period. Although its population increased during the 19th Century, Queen
Anne's declined during the early years of the 20th Century and has only
begun to regain its former size. Today Queen Anne's County is still
slightly belov; its 1790 size. The increases among the other counties
ranged from 13 per cent in Kent to 117 in Cecil County,

Throughout the history of the Nation, the relative importance
of the Eastern Shore in the State has declined sharply. In 1790, the
population of the nine counties represented one third of the State of
llaryland. Today it accounts for only 9.8 per cent of the total. During
these 159 years, the population of the State of Maryland increased almost
sixfold, v/hile that of the Eastern Shore did not quite double.

C)
(B I— I

n I

^ o

o
o

■<t

o o

fn ^

o c^

C5>

^ iH

c o

•P rH

Cd O

r-i

tX)
'fe^.tXl

T-\

£>

fc5

E-i

<a;

<i;

Oi^

•^

c
o o

•H r-i

4J cr

i-i

P.
O

rH rH

tX)OiifNOOvDO^r^
• ••••••••

O H 00 iH

r^ -vt H O I

OrHrH0^r^-<ff^->i-C^

• •«••••••

H r-^ r-i rH rH

• ••••••••

rH rH I-i r-i r-t

— w> ^ ^ *■ u '

-<tt3cotnc^ono! -

H rH rH H J - Q

•

o
o

r~rHOtOC^HvOrHO^

• ••••••••• •

C^iTvCVOOCVOOOi o

rHrH rHrHrHrHrH O

00 [> £^ O -^ »J^ CV
• ••«•••

00 C\i -vt -H ^ -^ fV
rH rH H rH rH rH

I 00 O

I • •

o o

rH O

1 H

OOOOOOOOO

ooooooooo

CT^vO^ irv^OO ".nOO irv

OOO^O^-cftrvrHOOO OJ
rHCVr\irHrHC\irHC»>C\i

OC^sOiTivOiA^OLr^
-.+ OOvOt>vOOO(^-vJ-

O -£) 00 t^ ->^ O CO
rH CNJ r\i rH rH C\i rH

rr, CSi

\OOOC~-OtnOiArH
rHlf\<,0«^r^u><VrH^
C\iC^\O<T<00^vOtX)00

0^^'^t»^D■^OvOO^vDrH
rHOiCVrHrHCVrHCVCV

vOOOOirNC^COU"NvOCT>
vO O rH O tr 1 vO vO iH r^
C^iHrHvOCNJOOOiri

C^C^f^C^O^rHO^OOO
rHCVrVrHrHr\irHrHrH

\0 Ts ir> o tn O -4-

O CV C-- rr\vO r-i 00

u^ ^0 00 00 -4-vO o

•« 1^ •« V\ »s tfi ws

O rn ir\ fV m iTv o^

r-i r-i rH i--{ r-{ r-{

O
O

H
C\i

O
O

•^
t^

o
o

c\i

•

«
O

rr\
O^

r-i

!-i

O ^

g u

-p

(D -P

3 -p o 0

<i;

=3 W

-33 O O 4J

E-i

M -P 'r* n

rH H ,':3

C! M O a Q)

(x)

O -rt O

-P

fJ 0) 4i o o

Ec,

U O t-,

2 e fH o t,

-aj

d O O

3 O -J -rl O

O O Q «

J" CO H E; E:

•H

■g

•^

•

tiO

-P

•r

»H

*t!

•P

•

-<J-

£>

•

-<1-

•\

•S

•d

•

•«*

-P

4-3

•H

3 m

CtJ

t>»

::1

r-i

■P

•■1.

•

.-'

•r(

ct)

• •

•H

fl.

■HI

(v-l

PER CAPITA BECOME

In terms of net effective buying income, vrhich measures income
after tax deductions, the nine counties in 194-8 represented about 8 per cent
of the State's total. As observed in Table 2, the individual counties fall
into t\io district groups. One is evidently above average in income pro-
ducing opportunities, the other balou average. The most properous counties,
namely \Jicomico, 'Worcester, Talbot, and Kent, have per capita incomes which
rank in the upper half of the counties, and are exceeded only by Montgomery,
Baltimore, Baltimore City, Allegany, Washington, and Anne Arundel, The
less prosperous, v;hile falling considerably below these, nevertheless
exceed the incomes in the State's three lowest counties. The per capita
incomes on the Eastern Shore range from '^>712 in Somerset to ''>1,266 in
Uicomico, with an average of '.1,053.

TABLE 2

EFFECTIVE B^jyEIG E^COIE ON THE EASTERN SHORE, 1%8

County

l!et InccFe
18,5'79,000

Per Capita
$ 983

Per Family

Caroline

$3,203

Cecil

28,227,000

95/.

3,360

Dorchester

28,270,000

955

3,249

Kent

17,306,000

1,19-i

3,762

Queen Anne's

11,961,000

777

2,545

Somerset

15,52/^000

712

2,388

Talbot

2^,4-31,000

1,253

4,072

V'icomico

/i9,ll?^,000

1,266

4,026

Worcester

28,2ii9,000

1,256

4,036

EASTERN SHORE

221,665,000

(?1,053

$3,625

STATE OF MRYLAl^D

$2,903,697,000

$1,354

$4,869

Source: Survey of

lying Power, May 19A9.

ASSESSABLE BASIS

The trend in the value of taxable property is a useful indicator
for measuring growth in general community prosperty. The assessable basis
for the nine counties in 1948 amounted to "}2BB ,313 ,222 , or 7.5 per cent of
the State total. In the ten-year period since 1938 the base of the nine
counties rose by 20 per cent from 02^0,2^6,427. (See Table 3.) Its share
of the State's total remained unchanged over the period.

The rise in property values varied from county to county. The
largest increases in the ten-year period occurred in Ificomico and Worcester
co^onties where the assessable base rose by 51,7 and 47.4 per cent, respect-
ively. Queen Anne's vas the onl3'- county which showed a decline during the
period,

TABLE 3

ASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPERTY ON THE EASTERI^ SHORE,

1938 AJ^D 1948

County 1938 1948 % Increase

Caroline $ 15,735,845 <} 19,799,247 25.8

Cecil 48,993,106 58,64A,118 19,7

Dorchester 29,407,567 32,02v,142 8.9

Kent 18,722,400 20,710,210 10.6

Cueen Anne's 27,935^234 22,104,922 -20.9

Somerset 13,924,945 17,706,968 27,2

Talbot 27,473,982 30,241,905 10,1

IJicomico 34,898,572 52,945,155 51,7

Worcester 23,154,776 34,136,555 47.4

EASTSRII SHORE $, 240,246,427 $ 288,318,222 20.0

STATE OF mRYLAl'TD ^3, 170, 606,135 '^3, 80 5, 394, 244 20.0

Source: State Ta^ Commission.

aiPLOYMENT MD WAGES

In the second quarter, 19-49, more than 35,000 nonagricultural
v/orkers, or 6,5 per cent of the State's total, irere employed on the Eastern
Shore, V.'icomico and Dorchester counties, accounted for 15,720, or almost
half the total for the area. (See Table 4.)

V/ages paid these vrarkers v.'ere considerably belou the State average,
In that period, workers on the Eastern Shore averaged only C;35.37 weekly,
as compared vrith "^jSO.SI for all nonagricultural vrorkers in the State. Six
of the nine counties fell below the area average; only Cecil, Wicomico, and
Queen Anne's exceeded it. Average v/eekly wages per employee ranged from
''';26.25 in Somerset County to %U'^U\A in Cecil County,

TABLE U

NOMGRICULTURAL El^PLOYl^SFT Al'JD WAGES ON THE EASTERN SHORE,

SECOl'ID QUARTER 19i;9

Average Monthly

Average Woelcly Wages

County

.^-mploTtient

per Employee

Caroline

3,350

^^33.68

Cecil

3,600

42.44

Dorchester

5/702

31,58

Kent

l,/"99

30.67

Queen Anne'

1,065

35.60

Somerset

2,496

26.25

Talbot

3,403

35.03

Wicomico

10.0.18

40.13

V/orcester

3 ',312

31.73

EASTERi!

SHORE

35,245

^^35.37

STATE OF MARYLAllD

538,521

G50.61

Sovirce: Department of Employment Security.

CHAPTER III
MAJOR INDUSTRIES

AGRICULTURE

Agriculture is the mi^in economic activity in this area. According to
the Census Bureau, it accounts for more than two thirds of the land area and
approximately one third of all gainfully employed workers, r/hile manufacturing
and trade hnve increased significantly within the past two decades, they have
not overtalcen agriculture in numbers of persons eraplcyed.

In 194-0 total gross farm income on the Eastern Shore was more than
$21,000,000, or ore third of the State total. By 1945, it had tripled to moru
than 863,000,000 cliiefly because of the tremendous expansion in poultry raisin;-,
and the general rise in prices. (See Table 5.) In 1945, it accounted for

TABLE 5

GROSS FARI\(1 INCOME ON THE EASTERN SHORE, 1940 AND 1945

1940 1945
Counties Total Rank Total Rank

Caroline $ 2,359,396 5 ^ 6,718,956 3

Cecil 2,471,174 3 4,628,328 7

Dorchester 2. 22 j, 343 6 4,667,635 6

Kent 1,986,251 8 -,361,819 9

Queen Anne-'s 2,364,537 4 5,:;63,536 5

Somerset 1,696,795 9 5,964,943 4

Talbot 2,064,300 7 4,627,855 8

V;icomico 2,754,3^7 2 12,640,607 2

Worcester 3;33ii5f0 1 14,598,965 1

EASTER!! SHORE $21,252,213 i 63,272,644

% On" STATE 33.2 41,5

S:ATE of liiARYLAI^ID $64>083,97C $ 152,373,814

Source: Census of Agriculture,

more than 41 per cent of the total agricultural crop in the State, In both
1940 an<i 1945, rJorcester and ITlcoaiico cour.ties ranked first aiid second.

o
o

•H
O
0)

<f -J- ir\ LTN LTN C^

c\j o oco u^ t>

• «•'>••

• «•«%•

d
o

o^ r^ c\j c^ O^ c~-

. ^

C^ ir\ rH nO rH C^

oi -4-

£>•

-4- C^ J>- -*vO H

O -4-00 CO -*

U> C^ (^ Cf^vO UA

irsO en O OCO

Lr> tr» -4" o ff . CO

-J-sO O vO O W

•V •* . •\ , •I a^ *k

•%

. "v •v •^ •^ •% •v .

•»

f^ -4- O rH vO ITN

•~\

vO O O C^ ^CO

MD O -^ O ^O O

-J-m t~0 rH CM

r^ ONvo c\i r^ CNi

=0=

O !>- CV CM C\i H

lr^

•\

•V r^ . •^

•\

r~\

Cf\

rH rH rH

-4

to C^ rr\ Lr\^o iH

CO VTN H to H !>■

«•••««

o
o

• • • • « •

CO CO C\ -4 -^ rH

t?.

v^ ON rH -4- rH MD

r^ iH rH rH rH

rH NO

-4" O rH CO <f CO

l/\

CM -4- CM rH C:- rH
-4- O rH r\l O CNi

o CM cn CM no cn

■-0 MD o en i~^ r^

£.~ O CO mD CO ir\

. •v n •\ . *\ . w es

•H

*^ «^ ax «> r\ ■\

•v

O -4- CNi !>-:}■ O

COnO -4-nD nO CO

rH C-- C-- O iH rH

;;'>

CM On m o m -d-

-cJ-

C3 CO i/NvO CV "^

rH rH rH rH H CO

•s

. •^ «> •N

•V

CM rH CO

C\J

r-l

O vD t>- CNJ CO CO

CO ON i-TN <t CM CM

• ••••*

• c • • • •

•

sO C\i u> ,H ,H ^

-4 rH O CM On rM
rH CM CM CM rH

"H -* l-l rH iH

r-l

t - O rH C~- O C^

irvvo -d" CO Lr\ C^

t>- <^0 O O H

en rH -4- X) -d- C\!

rH r- c^ ovo o

nO '^ On i>- !>■ CM

•\ . »» •* w^ . wv •^

•>

•» •% •% •x *\ w^

•>

CO rv rn o c^ -o

-4- en to nO Cn- nO

rH CO rH rH -4 -:r

C3 r-: -d- en (>] rH

en LPv ,— I ITN ir\ LTN

sO O O O -4 >J-\

•■

•V •%

•H

c
u
c:

El
O

c\i

ir\ r-\ ^ r-i O r-i

• <^ • • 9 •

c- o <t to -4 ^-

rH rH -4- .

o o CO o ITS en
o en rH to On m
H en O OC- CN-

» •v 1 •* . ^S , •X • »\

^ CM o <t- C' r-

CN- rH i-n enN,o c--

rH nO On eV C\! --4

r-{ en

nO O O nO -4 U>

r w • ■> «

-4 rH CnNO -4 tJj
•-^ r^ r-\ -^

-4

o
o

nO
m

-P

<D
W
U

i
O

o "-n CO to CO ir> I -*
O O en c-C~ <}■ ~*
C\J <r -4 u> On o nO

t^ CM r-i O C\i to

en en cv c- rH o
CM v/N CO -4 to en

o- r- CO oc\j ir\
a

to
jj
ti

-a
o
u

>i
o
o

ej (0
> 43

■fc?.

w
-p

to en o en en -4

• O « - * J c '

rH ~t en CJN cj o
CM "^

rH n; en so -4 £>
o o en o o o
no rH CO eno o

, •x •\ »\ *^ ^ •x .

O u-\ nO o vO to
o in cn- en en u-\

CM c\' rH m rH U^i

H en

-4 m CM CO O CM

• O • f> • •

i^ -4 no ei^. o o
CM en H

c^ iTv en -4 O CN-
CN- CJN ir\ rH en nq
onO -4 O ctn o

•s v^ •* « •% fN •N

o en en c> to c-

rH nC rH jO CJN rH

-4 e'^\ O c- -4 lA

, •» ax

r-' Ol

O
U

CO
43
CJ

3
T)
O
U

!0
O

t>>

m o

43 a.

3 73

•o C

O ci

U ^

CU t>.

t>l43

.^-^

o
o

. -13

S to

U o

43 >

rt o

'J
r)
o
u

o o

O JZ.

43 +3

to o
o

to
&, to

O 43

o 3

^ x:
nJ x3

+3 O

tOrH
O rH

> «j:

o
p.,

o
o

43 -n

^>
o -S

u
o

-4

-4
sO

nO
en
ir\

•\

E-"

tiO

•S

-o

<iH

«J

■Q

•

t>5

•

<L>

r-^

•H

<
<Vh

•r

<f.

tiO

• •

J-i

PL,

^^fl

respectively, in the value of gro.<3S farm income on the Eastern Shore. Owing
chiefly to the increase in poultry raising, Somerset County shifted from ninth
to fourth place among the counties between 194.0 and 194-5.

In addition to the raising of poultry, which is the chief agricultural
crop of the Eastern Shore, farms in the nine counties produce vegetables, live-
stock, dairy, and miscellaneous agricultural products. These together accounted
for the $63,000,000 agricultural crop in 194-5. As may be observed from Table 6,
almost half of the total value of farm products was attributable to poultry
raising, and 15 per cent to vegetables. The courtiss chiefly responsible for
the $29,400,000 poultry crop in 194-5 ^'ere T7orcester, Wicoraicc, Somerset, and
Caroline in the ord^r named. In these counties poultry products ranged in
importance from one ha?.f of total agricultural value in Caroline County to three
quarters in Somerset, The continued expansion of the poultry industry in the
postT:3r period haa further increased its relative importance in the total
agricultural prodaotion of the area^

SEAFOOD

In 194-5; more tha;.i 5.200 Eastern Shoremen mere engaged in taking sea-
food products frcm the E-.j and the surrounding waters. They comprised almost
trjo thirds ox £.11 commercial fisheri:i.?n in t'r.o State.

In terras of dollar value, the most important seafood products caught
in Maryland viaters are oysters, blue crabs, and miscellaneous fish products,
including striped 0^33, sea t.L^out, and croa.V.er. Th^ majority of the State's
$9,000,000 seafood crop in 194-5 was caught by fjshermen on the Eastern Shors.

MANUFACTURING

Second in economic importance to a'jriculture on the Eastern Shore is
manufacturing. In the past ten years, the nine counties, predominantly rural,
have shown a marked increase in manufacturing activity. According to the 1947

CeTtSUs of Manufactures, 444 establishments isere engaged in manufacturing mis-
cellaneous products in the area, in contrast •with only 370 in 1939. In 1947
theap establishments employed 15,400 production ivorkers, or 34 per cent in ex-
cess of the number employed in 1939. The Eastern Shore's increase in manufao-
turing employment during the eight-year period exceeded those of the Baltimore
Meti^opolitan area and of the State, which were 31 and 30 per cent, rospeftively.

In thr\t same period the Shore's relative share of total value added by
manufacture in the State increased from 3.8 per cent to 4.6 per cent, IThereas
value added by manufacture in the nine counties 5ji 1939 was $16,000,000, it rcs<*
to $53, 000 J 000 in 1947.

According to reports made to the Department of Emplr-yment Security
undar the Unemployment Compensation Laws of Maryland, 495 establishments on the
Eastern Shore had an average monthly emplojinent of 15,000 in the second quarter
of 1949.

The cannirg and processing of most of the Shore's seafood and agri- "^
cultural products is the leading manufacturing industry. It employs almost
50 per cent of all workers in man-of acturing . The production of all types of
appare»l accounts for another 20 per cent„

V/icomico and Dorchester are the l^iading counties in terms of the number
employed in manufacturing. Together they account for uore tu&u half the Shore's
manufacturing employees. Table 7 presents the employment distribution in the
manufa'^turing industries on the Eastex*n Shore,

Total employment in m^jiufacturing in the nine counties in relation to
the area population, is revealing, '.Vicomico, the chief manufacturing county,
employs more than 12 per cent of its total population in manufacturing and
Dorf hester County, more than 10 per cent. For purposes of comparison, it is
interesting to note that less than 12 per r'ont of Baltimore City's population
were engaged in manufacturing during the sane period.

TABLE 7

EMPLOYMENT DISTRIBUTION IN THE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES
ON THE Eii.STERN SHORE, SECOND QU/ilTER 1949 ^'

A. Total For Nine Counties

Average Monthly-
Number Of Employment Quarterly
Establishments Number ^. Total Hages

Food and Kindred Products

Textile Mill Products

Apparel and Related Products

Lumber and Products, except Furniture

Furniture and Fix+ures

Paper and Allied Products

Printing and Publishing Industries

Chemicals ai.d Allied Products

Petroleum and Coal Products

Rubber Products

Stone, Claj^ and Glass Products

Primary Metal Products

Fabricated Metal Products

Machinery (except Electrical)

Transportation Equipment

Instruments and Related Products

Miscellaneous Manufactures

TOTAL

164

6,660

42.1

$2,754,931

352

2.2

286,228

3,100

19.6

1,101,002

-e 125

2,041

12.9

805,960

316

2.0

182,770

413

2.6

225,563

«/

264

1.7

123,415

396

2.5

248,021

328

2.1

200, 583

1,936

12.3

1,033,847

495

15,806 100.0 $6,962,320

B. Caroline County

Food and Kindred Products 30

Apparel and Related Products 3

Lumber and Products, Except Furniture 4

Printing and Publishing Industries 6

Chemicals and Allied Products 1

Stone, Clay, and Glass Products 1

Transportation Equipment 2

Miscellaneous Manufactures 6

TOTAL 53

1,045

55.9 1

; 370, 173

1-5

7,386

2.8

28,069

a/
a/
a/

a/
a/

743

39.9

247,208

1,868 100.0 $ 652,856

C. Cecil County

Food and Kindred Products 8

Textile Mill Products 2

Apparel and Reliited Products 3

Lumber and Products, Except Furniture 8

Furniture and Fixtures 1

Paper and Allied Products 2

Printing and Publishing Industries 4

Chemicals and Allied Products 5

Rubber Products 2

1.8

3.6

^-/

1.8

182

11.8

9,011

a/
22,242

-^
a/

14, 162

108,336

C. Cecil County (Contd.)

Ir.'^ustry

Stone, Clay, and Glass Products
Prim.u-y Metals Industries
Fabricated Letal Products
Machinery (except Electrical)
Transportation Equipment
Miscellaneous Manufactures

Number
Establish

imerts

Average Monthly

Employment
Nun>ber % Total

3
2
1
1
3

117 7.5

1,U9 74.1

TOTAL

1,5

Quarterly

VJages

a/
a/
a/

82,163

765,611

100.0 $1,001,525

D, Dorchester County

Food and Kindred ?rod'icts
Apperel and Re laced Products
Lumber and Products, e:.:cept Furniture
Printing and Publi-^hing Industries
Chemicals and All-.^id Products
Stone^ Clay, and Class Products
Fabrioated metal Products
Transportation Equipment
Miscellane o'us Manufactures

TOTAL

E. Kent and Queen Anne's

Food and Kindred Products
Textile Biill Products
Apparel and F.elated Products
Lumber and Products, except Furniture
Printing and Publiohing Industries
Chemicals and Allied Products
Stone, Clay, and Glass Products
Transportation Equipment
Miscellaneous Manufactures

1,466

50.0

$ 625,997

r-43

28.5

302,830

236

8.1

101,061

1.1

19,023

•±l

1.4

20j 593

342
2,961

11.5

197 ..800

100.0

$1,267,309

ine's

Counties

459

49.8

$ 157,088

^/.

2/.

4.2

20,852

426

46.1

178,436

TOTAL

924. 100.0 % 356,376

F. Somerset County

Food and Kindred Products 17

Apparel and Related Products 4

Lumber and Products, Except Furniture 16

Furniture and Fixtures 1

Printing and Publishing Industries 3

Chemicals and Allied Pro-^.ucts 1

Stone, Clay, ?.nd Glass Products 1

Fabricated Metal Products 1

Miscellareous Manufactures 2

TOTAL 46

443

40.8 %

165,648

315

29.0

86.563

156

14.4

41,424

^'^

a/.

S/,

_a/

173

16>0

103,018

1,087

100.0 $

396,653

Industry

Food and Kindred Products

Textile Mill Products

Apparel and Related Products

Lumber and Products, except Furniture

Furniture and Fixtures

Printing and Publishing Industries

Stone, Clay, and Glass Products

Primary Metal Industries

Fabricated ketal Products

Transportation Equipment

Miscellaneous Manufactures

TOTAL

Talbot County

Average

Monthly

Number Of

Employment

Quarterly

Establishments

Number

% Total

V/aees

810

70.6

% 335,021

liture 5

3.0

9,^59

^f,

Les 2

2.6

10,566

7.-4

56,983

■•«•

188

16. .;

83,272

1,U8 100.0 % 495,301

H, Wicomico County

Food and Kindred Products
Textile Mill Products
Apparel and Related Products
L'omber and Products, except Furniture
Printing and Publishing Industries
Chemicals and Allied Products
Stone, Clay, and Glass Products
Fabricated Metal Products
Machinery (except Electrical)
Transportation Equipment
Instruments and Related Products
Miscellaneous Manufactures

TOTAL

1,634

34.8 %

; 796,

,136

1,311

27.9

495.

,965

1,017

21.7

432,

,7C0

112

2.4

70,

,369

1.7

42,

,3U

1,7

48,873

0.7

13,

,005

425

9.1

292,839

118

4,695 100.0 12,192,201

I. Worcester County

Food and Kindred Products 25

Textile Mill Products 2

Apparel and Related Products 4

Lumber and Products, except Furniture 31

Printing and Publishing Industries 3

Chemicals and Allied Products 2

Petroleum and Coal Products 1

Stone, Clay, and Glass Products 4

Transportation Equipment 2

Miscellaneous Manufactures 1

TOTAL 75

% 295,857

46, 508

187,195

6,874

63,685

1,569 100.0 % 600,119

115

49.4

155

9.9

503

32.1

0.9

122

7.8

Source: Department of Employment Security.

1/ Percentages will not necessarily total 100.0 bocauso of rounding,

a/ Withheld to avoid disclosing figures for individual firms; data included
with Miscellaneous Manufactures,

RETAIL TRADE

In 19^8 retail sales on the Eaatem Shore totaled $158,592,000, or
8.5 per cent of the total for the State, (See Table 8.) More than a quarter
of all sales ':5;as in food products v?hich represented 8.5 per cent of all food
products sold in retail stores in the State, The sales of general merchandise
and furniture - household - radio products, which together accounted for 8.2
per cent of all Eas+ern Shore sales, represented only 4-1 per cent and 1,2
per cent, respectively, of all State sales made in each of these groups.

According to Table 8, Wicomio County is the most important trading
center on the Eastern Shore. Almost a quarter of total retail sales was made
in retail outlets in the County. Another 26 per cent was made in the outlets
in rZorcester and Dorchester counties combined. The dollar value of sales ranged
from $8,5-41,000 in Queen Anne's County to $36,997,000 in Wicomico.

The 1,353 retail establishments operating on the Eastern Shore in the
second quarter 1949, employed 6,500 workers or 6.2 per cent of all employees
in retail outlets in the State. (See Table 9.) As in the case of the volume
of salesj Wicomico led all counties in the number of workers employed. The
four largest counties, in terms of employment in retail trade, V?icomico,
Horcester, Dorchester, and Cecil in the order named, accounted for almost tTTo
thirds of the Eastern Shore total. Employment in retail trade ranged from
222 in Queen Anne's County to 1,550 in 7?icomico County.

^
g

•H

- #v . •>

-3

ir\,-i

-p

c^O

-*o

•s •>

r-l

^;1

<r;

-p

•H

»IC

-4-

^ c

G x;
o o
o u

o
o

O OO o o o o
o oo o o o o
o o o o o o o

«v . •\ «% ^ . •% . p\ •s

CO itno ir\ in iTN OD
CD O^O O O ir\ O
rH <^^o c\i -4- u-N -d-

*\ #\ . •v . •* . •s . •s •*
rH CO U^ -J- <>J C^ LTN
M rH CNi r-f

OOOOOOOOQ
OOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOO

CO r-l t> rH <(■

r>^r^ O t>- -J

CNi

"> -J- C^ CO
LfN IPv O LTN

OOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOO

oo 00~J-t>C^MD CM

r^r^vo o^vo I— I -j-c^-cv

cncvi -4- ON rH (^ O O -C-

OOO^-^OOOOO
OOOOJOOOOO

ooo ooooo

O-r^vO CO CO O CO o
OA rH C5^ lO t> r'M> rH

u-\-4- LPi o^ ur\ -J- CO r-!

H -J-CM

OOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOO

vOO^CVC^'^U^COrH-4
OU^OOC~-f^CV-i^
U^OC^mC^COCOrHC^

c^nO vO o> cvi r^ -J- £>- -4-

• • » ••■•.• • •

C-rH CM i>-LPVU-\CNJ r^-t

rH rH rH CV rH

OOOOOOOOO
O O O O O O >_5 o o

oor. oooooo

^/^ -4 CM CM rH O O C-- rH
ir\ o^ -O Lr\ -j- o^ m CT^ 'A
CO K) t>- r^ ir\ C^ CO O o'\

. *\ •%.»* •* •S,»*,*\.»\ •%

rH C^ O ("kJ CO CO O vD C^i

HiH rH rH r-1 <r\ CI

•,H

r-\

o
*>
to
o

u
o
a

<D li
C'CO

o
o

-4-
O

o
o

=c^

o
o
o

-J-
=15=

o
o

•\

rH
rH

O
O

o
c^

O
O
O

CM
O

•\
CO

-4-

o
o
o

•\

C!N

o
o
o

*\
00

o
o
o

•\
CA
vO

•\
CM

o
o
o

O
O
CM

o
o
o

o
en
c^

-4
O
-4

^ \i^

o
o
o

o
r-

-4-

«n

CTN

-4-

-P

!>>

•\

-p

•H

t-.

•H

;§

»•

•4

i-j-

CMl

TABLE 9

EMPLOYMENT DISTRIBUTION IN RETAIL TRADE ON
THE EASTERN SHORE, SECOND QUARTER 19^9

Average

Monthly

Number Of

Employment ^ /

Quarterly

County Establishments

Number

% Total-^

Wases

Caroline

105

^56

7.0

200,059

Cecil

178

796

12.2

324,460

Dorchester

162

905

13.9

411,807

Kent

U2U

6.5

160,894

Queen Anne's

222

3.4

82,292

Somerset

105

355

5.5

136,182

Telbot .

161

772

11.9

337,125

Wicomico

273

1,550

23.8

849,630

Worcester

221

1,024

15.7

386,073

EASTERlNl SHORE

1,353

6,50ii

100.0

2,888,522

% OF STATE

10.4.

6.2

5.4

STATE OF IvlARYLAND 12,983

105,184.

!J53,625,349

Source: Department of Employment Security,

1/ Percentages will not necessarily total 100.0 because of rounding.

CHAPTER IV
PROBABLE EFFECTS OF THE BAY BRIDGE ON THE MAJOR INDUSTRIES

AGRICULTURE

From a spe'-ial study conductQd by the State Planning Commission
in 194.9, it was found that the agi-iculture of the Eastern Shore would not
be materially affected by the Chesapeake Bay Bridge. -^'The study revealed
that:

(1) The Bridge will have little effect on the
marketing of wheat grown on the Eastern Shore,

(2) Eastern Shore dairymen are well satisfied with
their present markets, and the Bridge will not
induce any larger shipments of milk to Baltimore,

(3) Shipments of livestock to Baltimore from the
Eastern Shore can be expected to . , . increase
as truckers learn of the facilities and higher
prices offered by the Union Stock Yards in
Baltimore,

(4.) The majority of Eastern Shore fruits and vege-
tables will continue to be sold in the northern
cities because of the higher prices offered to
the farmers. No important increases in produce
shipments to the Baltimore market can be expected,

(5) ^Jhile the Bridge may facilitate the marketing

of poultry in the Baltimore and IVashington markets,
there will probably be no large increase in poultry
shipments to the VJestern Shore,

In addition, it should be noted that Eastern Shore agricultural
production may be favorably affected by such population increases as re-
sult from the growth of manufacturing and trade in these counties. Tho
expanded tourist and vacation trade will also provide an expanded market
for local agricultural produce.

1/ Maryland State Planning Commission, Possible Economic Effects of
Chesapeake Bay Bridge on Eastern Shore .AfLTicjJltur e, Special Report
by IrVilliam D. Clayton, i-)A9»

SEAFOCO

As in the case of agriculture, seafood will probably not vdtness
any extensive changes with tho opening of the Bridge, Viliat effects vdll
be felt vdll probably be the indirect result of any increases in population
brought about by the growth of manufacturing and trade in the Eastern Shore
counties, and the expanded tourist and vacation traffic. Such increases
in demand for seafood products will be most apt to affect price, and only
secondarily, total amount of the catch marketed.

MANUFACTURING

Manufacturing, as is shown in Chapter III, has witnessed material
growth in recent years. The greater accessibility afforded by the Bridge.,
should effect a further growth by facilitating the shipment to and from
Baltimore of both raw materials and finished products. However, this will
probably be a slow process, taking many years to develop.

The cities of the Shore can now offer available labor supplies
of all skills at lower wage rates than thoso paid in Baltimore, This
factor plus greater accessibility should not only facilitate the expansion
of existing manufacturing establishments, but should also encourage tho
location of new facilities on the Shore. Where manufacturers in the past
have either failed to consider, or have actually rejected these locations,
they can now be expected to consider them more seriously in the selection
of new sites c

The existence of a pool of available labor can be .iudged only
on the basis of the present supply. ■ The local State Employment offi^-es on
the Shore reported some 2,000 workers of various skills as unemployed and
currently registered for jobs as of the middle of November 194-9. Of this
number about 70 per cent were either semf.skilled or unskilled who would be

readily usable in most general types of factory employment. The available
labor supply also included 250 skilled workers. Almost one third of the
total labor supply vrere registered with the Cambridge office v/hich serves
Dorchester and Caroline counties, 1/Jhile no actual breakdo^m of these
workers was available by place of residence, it is reasonable to expect
that most of them live in Cambridge proper. Salisbury and Elkton also
have many workers available for employment.

In addition to the workers actually registered, there are others
who could be drawn upon with the expansion of manufacturing activity in
the area. They include workers unemployed but not currently registered
v/ith the local employment offices, as v/ell as those not yet in the labor
market. Experience has shown that with the location of attractive employ-
ment opportunities in a community, some vjorkers, particularly v/omen, have
been dravm into the labor market.

Manufacturers seeking to locate on the Shore will not only find
a supply of labor available but will also find currently in Cambridge three
small vacant plants varying in size from 1,000 to 7,800 square feet. Cam-
bridge, as well as other Shore cities, also has available many undeveloped
areas where nev; pl&nt facilities could be located,

RETAIL TRf.DE

The effects of the Bridge on retail trade vrill probably be felt
in many v/ays. Any increases in income resulting from the expantjion of
agricultural or industrial production v/111 affect retail trade in the
Eastern Shore counties. It has been stated that trade and se^rvice establish-
ments, alive to thcic potent iaJ. it ies, may create cc^ siderable employment
in addition to the original agricultural or industrial expansion. The

Gary Industrial Foundation, Inc. has estimated that manufacturing payroll
money usually creates business in the city in a volume of 2-g- to 3-^ times
the payrolls themselves. Another study reveals that an increase of ten
jobs in a basic economic activity v/ill automatically cause an increase of
eight jobs in service lines.

Retail trade on the Eastern Shore vjill also be affected by the
increases in Forth-South highway traffic which the Bridge vd.ll make possible.
However, the most promising source of increase in retail trade will be the
expansion of the vacation trade and the incorr-e it i/ill bring to the counties
of the Eastern Shore. This is discussed in greater detail in Chapter VII.

CHAPTER V
VACATION CENTER

The Eastern Shore is best knovn to most Marylanders for its vacation
areas. Its position on the Cfcean as uell as the Bay provides it with vacation
centers of uide variety. The Ocean, with its surf bathing and deep sea fish-
ing attracts the largest number of vacationers. The Bay, \;ith its long and
much indented shoreline, large areas of shallow water, numerous tributary
rivers, and small streams provides many fishing, yachting, and si'/imming
centers. The rural areas and scenic land of the central peninsula offer
opportunities to city dv/ellers for a real vacation on the farm.

There are a great number of places to which vacationers interested
in the many activities of the Shore can go. However, in this report dis-
cussion is confined to the more high.ly developed centers, vfhich may be
expected to profit in the immediate future from the increased traffic across
the new bridge,

DESCRIPTION OF VACATION kmkS

Traveling south fron the head of the Peninrula, the vacationer
first reaches Elk Necl: State Park in Cecil Couiity, a iOOO-acre tract fronting
on both the Chesapealce Bay and the E?.k River. These waters fiu^nish ample
facilities for fishing and swimming. The Pari:, operated by the Department
of State Forests and Parks ; maintains vacation cabins v.'hich are available
on advance reservations v;ith the Department of State Forests and Parks in
Annapolis.

In Kent County, the nearest Eastern Shore county to Baltimore,
there are three developed resort locations, namely Eetterton, Chestertown,
and Tolchester Eeach. Connected with Baltimore by large exciursion boats,

Betterton, on the Sassafras River, offers picnicking, swimming, boating,
fishing, and other amusements for day visitors. Lodging is available at
hotels, cottages, and private homes in Betterton as well as in near-ty
Chestertov.Ti.

Located on the Chester River, Chestertown is an important vacation
center frequented by many visitors. In addition to the fishing, boating,
and swimming on the River, Chestertown has been described as "a gracious
old place . . . the very essence of the Eastern Shore v/ith its mellow
combination of sights, feelings, tastes and smells that recall centuries
of pleasant living." 1/ Late in July the Chester River Yacht and Country
Club is host to scores of sailing and power boats participating in the
Chester River Regatta. A special point of interest in Chestertown is
historic Washington College founded in 1782.

Some 12 miles to the west of Chestertown on the Bay, is Tolchester
Beach, a famous Maryland resort. Here facilities are provided for picnick-
ing, sv/imming, fishing, boating, and other daytime amusements. The local
hotel, as well as private homes and restaurants, offer lodging and meals
for the visitors to the area.

To the south in Talbot County, the tidewater area in the vicinity
of St, Michaels, Claiborne, Tilghraan, and Oxford affords m.any opportunities
for swimming, boating, and fishing in the abundant vjaters of the Bay,
Visitors to the area can find accommodations at Royal Oak, Claiborne,
Oxford, and Tilghman, Near-by Easton offers luxury accommodations at a
new air conditioned hotel opened in I9/4.9.

Cambridge, in Dorchester County, on the two mile vride Choptank
River is a resort tovm, a bustling harbor, and a thriving industrial center.

1/ U, S. V.'orks Progress Administration, Maryland. A Guide To The Old Line
State; 19/^0, p. 366,

The River affords excellent yachting, fishing, and swimming facilities,
and the City holds much of interest for the visitor. The tv/o hotels, with
their combined total of 81 rooms, as well as numerous guest houses, private
homes, and restaurants serve the visitors to this thriving community.

Continuing do\m the Bay to Somerset County, the traveler reaches
Crisfield, the seafood center of the Eastern Shore. Lodged on a cove off
Tangier Bay, it is given over entirely to harvesting, packing and shipping
of vast cargoes of oysters, crab, and fish fron all parts of the lower
Chesapeake. Visitors to this section of the Eastern Shore can be accommo-
dated at the two hotels and private homes in the area.

Ocean Ci+y is Maryland's large seashore resort, located directly
on the Atlantic, It is noted for its ocean sv/imming, boating, and deep
sea fishing. Though fish of all kinds are caught in the ocean waters and
Sinepuxent Bay to the west, it is big gare fishing, chiefly of white marlin,
which has brought Ocean City its fame. Like other important Atlantic resortr
it has a boardwalk extending along the beach front.

SAITDY POBIT STATE PARK

In considering the expected increase in vacation travel to the
Eastern Shore, it is appropriate that mention be made of the new 670-acre
State Bayside Park being constructed at Sandy Point, the v/estern terminus
of the Bridge. Day tourists from the Baltimore Metropolitan Area, the
Washington Metropolitan Ai'ea, and other parts of the Uestern Shore will
probably patronize the Park in great numbers. It will offer such facilities
as sv;imming in the Pay as v/ell as pools, picnickingj and boating on artificial
lakes. Ample parking areas v/ill be provided as well as bathhouses and play-
ground areas for children and adults* Since facilities will be available
only for daytime activities, Sandy Point State Park will probably not

absorb a significant portion of the increased vacation trade expected on
the Eastern Shore,

B-lPLOYl'IEKT Al'D BICOME

The hotels, tourist houses and other lodging places, and the
restaurants in the nine Eastern Shore counties provide employment for
almost 2,0C0 vorkers. More than a third of these work in Worcester County's
many seashore hotels and restaurants. Employnent increases sharply during
the peak summer months and falls off after Labor Day, On the basis of
Retail Sales and Use Tax Collections; reported for the fiscal year 19^9,
it may be estimated conservatively that the total incor.e of all lodging
places and restaurants v;as almost '"'.18,000,000, Worcester County accounted
for almost '.5,000,000 of this total v/ith IJicomico and Cecil counties
following close behiiid.

l.Tien these figiires are compared with income from agriculture,
manufacturing, or tro.de, the vacation business does not appear to be of
major significance. It must be remembered, hov/ever, that vacationers
make many other expenditures, not reflected in these figures. Undoubtedly
the industry's importance lies in its potentialities for future growth,
rather than in its present status.

CIL1PTER VI
THE BAY BRIDGE AS A MAJOR LINK IN MORTH-SOUTH TRAFFIC

Uith passenger cars in the majority of families in the Nation,
Americans have become the greatest travelers the world has ever seen.
Truck and passenger cars move over the highways in all directions in ever
increasing volume. The most heavily traveled route in the United States
is that linlcing New England and Kew York with VJashington and points South.

PRESENT HIGH'JAY ROUTES

After crossing the Hudson River, traffic moving south from New
York to Washington most frequently follov/s U.S. 1 to New Brunswick, U.S.
130 to the Pennsville-New Castle Ferry, vjhere it crosses the Delav/are
River and follov/s U.S. 4.0 across the Susquehanna River Bridge at Havre
de Grace to Baltimore. From there, U.S. 1 is picked up to Washington,
Richmond, and the South. (See Figiire 2.)

While this is the most popular route a considerable amount of
traffic out of New York follows U. S. 1 through Trenton, Philadelphia,
and Baltimore to Washington, Richmond, and points South, Since the opening
of the Potomac River Bridge near liorgantown in 194-0, southbound traffic
has increasingly followed U.S. 301 out of Baltimore across the Bridge
directly to Richmond. This route has permitted traffic to by-pass Wash-
ington, D. C. , completely and has accomplished a time saving of some 30
minutes,

A good portion of the traffic heading far south crosses the Dela-
v/are River via the Pennsville-New Castle Ferry and follovfs U.S. 13 dovm
through the Delmarva Peninsula to the Cape Charles Ferry. Crossing on to
the Virginia mainland, traffic picks up U.S. 17, which it follows all the
vray to Florida.

FIGURE 2

PRESENT AND PROJECTED HIGHWAY ROUTES
BETWEEN NEW YORK CITY AND RICHMOND, VIRGINIA

OCEAN CITY

CAPE CHARLES

LEGEND"

'EXISTING U.S. HIGHWAYS

...PROJECTED HIGHWAYS

APRIL 1950

MARYLAND STATE PLANNING COMMISSION

PROJECTED HIGH. 'AY ROUTES

In 1949 v/ork was begim on three majoi* links in the interregional
system of highways to run from Portland, Maine, to Richmond, Virginia, and
the South. These included the Chesapeake lay Bridge betv/een Sandy Point
and Stevensville ; the Delaware Memorial Bridge to replace the ferry at
Pennsville; and the Nev; Jersey Turnpike, the express toll highway running
from the Delaware Memorial Bridge ncrtheesu tc the George Washington Bridge
endl'ev; York City. Completion of the toll expressway is currently
expected in 1951. The tv;o bridges should be opened to traffic by the
summer of 1952.

After 1952 through traffic intent on by-passing the major cities
will be able to traraflothe New Jersey Turnpike or the old routes through
Hew Jersey to the Delaware Memorial Bridge, After crossing the Delavrare
River motorists vfill follow U.S. -^0 to Elkton and U.S. 213 from there to
the juncture of U.S. 50, which leads to the Chesapeake Bay Bridge. From
Sandy Point on the west shore of the Bay, traffic will move along the Revell
Highv/ay, across the nevr Severn River Bridge, over the new Annapolis to
VJashington highway paralleling U.S. 50, which vjill connect with U.S. 301
crossing the PotoHiac River Bridge at Morgantov/n to Richmond and points
South. In the years immediately following the completion of the Bay Bridge,
but before the completion of the Annapolis to Washington expressway, traffic
destined for the nation's Capital will follow Maryland Route U^U from the
western terminus of the Bridge, across the new Severn River Bridge to
U.S. 50, and vrest to the District of Columbia. (See Figure 2.)

The nev; route across the Bay vrill also serve as an alternate for
motorists now using coastal route U.S. 13 through the Delmarva Peninsula
and crossing the Cape Charles Ferry to U.S. 17 on the mainland. (See Figure 2).
Anticipating the competition from this nem express route, promoters of the

33
U.S. 13 route are, among other reasons, attempting to increase its attrac-
tiveness by shortening the distance and travel time across the Bay at the
southern tip of the Delmarva Peninsula. The ferry at Cape Charles is being
moved to Kiptopeke, some 9 miles to the southeast. The distance across the
Bay will thus ba reduced 4.T nautical, or 5"* land miles, and travel time,
30 minutes.

For Maryland' s share of the interregional express highway, the
State Roads Commission has begun wcrk on a number of highways and has others
in the planning state. In January 1950 work was begun on the Annapolis to
Washington divided expressway. Contracts were let on the new bridge across
the Severn River to carry traffic from the Revell Highway and the Bay Bridge
to Parole on the expressway. Contracts were also let on a 8.7-mile stretch
of road west across the South River to the Prince George's County line and
the juncture with U.S. 301, as well as on the new bridge to cross the South
River. Completion of this entire stretch from Annapolis to the juncture
with U.S. 301 is expected by the time of the opening of the Bay Bridge.
However, work on the stretch of the expressway west to the Nation's Capital,
while projected, has not been undertaken ahd will probably not be completed
until 1955 or thereafter.

On the Eastern Shore an expressway from the eastern terminus
through Queen Anne's County to Warwick in Kent County on the Delaware State
line is projected. Hork has started on the 9-mile stretch from Stevensville
on Kent Island to Queenstown. Completion of this stretch is expected in
time for the opening of the Bay Bridge. The extension of this expressw£.y
through Queen Anne's and Kent counties to Warwick on the Delaware State line
has been projected although not yat begun. Completion of this stretch is
not expected until 1955 or thereafter.

To carry traffic further north, e. stretch of the interregional
highway will run from r7arwick through the State of Delaware, to connect

v;ith U.S. Route 13 to the Dalauare Memorial Bridge just south of Wilming-
ton, l.Tiile this stretch is also projected, actual construction is not
yet unden-;ay. Completion dates are therefore indefinite at this time.
Upon construction of the entire network of higterays, of which
the Bay Bridge will be an important link, motorists will have a through
route over which they may move at high speeds, by-passing every major city
en route,

ESTB'I/^TES OF EXPECTED TI^.FFIC

Detailed estimates of expected Bay Bridge traffic have been made.l/
Hov/ever, these have been based chiefly on recent grovrth in ferry traffic
plus an allovjance for increased traffic induced 07 the Bridge, assuming
the present toll structure. Mo particular consideration is given to the
increase in traffic by virtue of the Bridge's position as a link in the
network of interregional express highvfays. For the first year of bridge
operation, a total traffic of approximately 1,200,000 vehicles is forecast;
increasing approximately 5 per cent annually.

These estimates, having been prepared for financial purposes,
are advisedly conservative. In point of fact, ferry traffic, by the
year ending September 30, 19/+9 had grown to 702,000, an increase of 20
per cent over the previous yeaj^ in contrast to the 8 per cent projected
in the estiaates.

Some further account must also be taken of the increased use to
be made of the Bridge by motorists desiring to by-pass the major urban
centers. Figxires on the number of motorists using near-by existing links
in the long-distance highv;ay network give sokg indication of a minimum
number vrho may be expected to follov; the new route,

1/ Ccverdalc and Colpi''-ts, Report or Traffic and Revenues. Proposed
Chosape.-,'"':e Bay Prid^-,:;, Sepcember i5, 19^8, pp, 17-13,

In the year ending September 19A9 more than 2,500,000 vehicles
used the Ilev; Castle-Pennsville Ferry over the Delavjare River. It is
estiirated that half as many additional vehicles crossed the Delaware River
via the Chester Ferry, 1/ In the same period almost 5,000,000 vehicles
used the Susquehanna River Bridge at Havre de Grace, Although almost
half of these were llaryland cars, the other half were probably long-
distance travelers. Vehicles desirous of avoiding Washington on the way
to Richmond and the South have used the Potomac River Bridge in large
numbers. In the 12-month period ending September 19A-9, it v;as used by
almost 900,000 vehicles. Only about 35 per cent of these vrere of Mary-
land origin. The others, with the possible exception of those of Virginia
origin, were probably on long-distance trips.

These figures indicate that large numbers of motorist have
recognized the advantages and have availed themselves of the existing
facilities in order to avoid congested urban centers. To be sure, these
facilities have increased the cost of the trip, but have at the same time
effected a considerable saving of time. By using the Bay Bridge motorists
vfill be able to accomplish a further time saving. It is estimated that at
least one hour can be cut off travel time between the Juncture of routes
U,S. 13 and U.S. 4,0 in Delav/are and routes U.S. 1 and U.S. 301 at Richmond,
Virginia.

Certainly many motorists v;ill be attracted to the new route for
these reasons. The only major deterrent to its use may be the increased
expense involved. Table 10 lists the present toll cliarges between Richmond
and l!ew York C?.ty as well as thoje expected with the opening of the Bay
Bridge. Experience has shown that usually the advantages of such a route
have more than offset the Increased expense.

1/ Cov-rdale .'ind Co'.pittij^ Trafric ar^: Reve - ./■^ Re^o.H. I:3W Jersey Turnpike,
September 1>49, p. 31 *

Toll

00.50

r .90

.20

1.00

Facility

Holland Tunnel
Few Jersey Tumpilce
Delav/are Memorial Bridge
Chesapeake Bay Bridge
Potomac River Bridge

Toll

$o.-ro

1.75

.90

2.00

1.00

TABLE 10

AVERAGE TOLL CR'iRGES FOR PASSEflGER CARS BETl'^EEN
NEW YORi: CITY AND RICHMOND, VIRGINIA
1950 AI'ID 1952

Present Route. 1950 New Route. 1952

Facility

Holland Tunnel

New Castle-Pennsville Ferry .90
Susquehanna River Bridge
Potomac River Bridge

Total $2.60 Total $6.15

However, active publicity of the advantages of this new route
will be necessary to attract large numbers of users. Since the Bridge
will be merely a link in a larger network of express highways, joint
efforts publicizing the entire route should stimulate total traffic.
Taking all factors into consideration, it is estimated that a total of
approximately 2,000,000 veliicles vrill use the Bridge in its first jrear
of operation. In futiore years, \r±th effective joint publicity, an increase
in traffic between five and ten per cent annusilly can be expected,

EFFECTS ON LAND VALUES

The benefits accruing to agriculture, manufacturing, and the
trade and service industries should, in time, be reflected in increased
land values in the Eastern Shore counties, VJhile the exact effects on
the assessable basis cannot be predicted, studies of the effects of other
large-scale capital improvements show that land values consistently rise
at a higher rate in the areas immediately affected hy the improvement, 1/

1/ Reviev/ of New Jersey Business ^ "The Influence of the New Jersey

Turnpike on the Future Development of the State," January 1950, pp. 2, 10.

The counties and the municipalities of the Eastern Shore, particularly
those in the vicinity of the Bridge itself, the highway tlirough Cueen
Anne's and Kent counties to Warwick, and the highv/ay to Ocean City can
expect to see like increases in the assessed valuation of property.
Similar increases in the assessable basis can also be expected in the
neighborhood of the many vacation centers which will benefit from the
increased traffic.

EXPECTED E'COME FROM DECREASED TRAFFIC

The increase in traffic through the Eastern Shore will undoubtedly
make greater use of local facilities, such as, filling stations and garages,
restaurants, tourist houses, and hotels.

In the second quarter 194-9, there were 232 retail filling stations,
repair shops, and garages operating in the nine Eastern Shore counties.
Together they employed an average of more than 800 vrorkers and paid them
a total of "^322,000 in wages for the three-month period. ¥ith the seasonal
increase in tourist traffic during the summer months, emplos^nent and pay-
rolls in these establishments in the third quarter 194-9 was considerably
higher.

During the year 194-8, filling stations, repair shops, and garages
on the Eastern Shore had a combined total income of more than $7,000,000.
Hov; much the grov/th in through traffic on the Eastern Shore \7ill increase
this figiire is impossible to predict, since travelers through the area
may or may not purchase their gasoline and have their repairs made on the
Shore. A two-cent tax differential in New Jersey's favor may operate
against large-scale gasoline purchases in U&ryland. However, with the
completion of the Bridge, the increase of more than 1,000,000 vehicles
passing through the Eastern Shore counties will necessarily make greater

use of these facilities and consequently increase gross income.

Although restaurants and tourist houses will probably be restricted
along the new State highways through the Eastern Shore coixnties, those
facilities adjoining the highv/ays will of course be used by tourists.

Mere than 230 eating and drinking places are presently operated
on the Eastern Shore to take care of the resident and visiting population.
In the second quarter of 1%9, a nonpeak period, they employed more than
1,000 workers and paid them more than '"^300, 000 in quarterly wages. The
Eastern Shore counties also maintained some 75 hotels, rooming houses,
and tourist homes employing more than 800 workers. In the second quarter
of 194-9 these workers earned almost ''.160,000,

During the fiscal year 194-9, total income to these establishments,
estimated on the basis of Retail Sales and Use Tax collections, conserva-
tively totaled almost ^.17,000,000, With a total of 700,000 vehicles cross-
ing the ferry during the year ending September 30, 194-9, and a total fore-
cast of 2,000,000 Bridge crossings following its completion, approximately
1,300,000 additional vehicles v;ill be visiting the Eastern Shore. Of these
about half will be travelers merely driving through the Shore, With an
assumed average of three passengers per car including the driver, 1/ this
traffic should bring about 2,000,000 additional travelers through the area.

While it is impossible to know exactly how much these travelers
will spend in passing through the nine counties, some very rough approxi-
mations can be made. AssTJming that an average of f?5 daily is spend for
food and lodging, and that one in three of four tourists will stop on the
Eastern Shore to eat or spend the night, it is estimated that an increase

1/ Estimates of the size of vacation parties varying from 2,44 persons
per car to 4, are derived from U.S. Travel. A Digest, by U,S, Travel
Division, National Park Ser^rlce, U.S, Department of Interior, 1949,
p. 2-13.

in gross income of about $3,500,000 annually will accrue to these facili-
ties. This minimmn figure can be increased if special efforts are made
to attract the potential trade with xinusual restaurants or superior
lodging places at reasonable rates. New or attractive tourist camps,
like the luxury motel colony and restaurant proposed for construction on
the Revell Highway, and restaurants specializing in Maryland food at fair
prices may attract travelers v/ho would otherwise stop elsewhere.

Any expenditures in excess of the assumed minimum average per
person, plus those expenditiu*es made in the area's filling stations and
repair shops, vdll, of covirse, result in increased income to the Eastern
Shore facilities in the vicinity of the projected new highways. This
increased trade may affect all nine counties, but more than likely, what
expenditures are made will be in those Eastern Shore counties north of
the Bridge, principally Queen Anne's and Kent,

CHAPTER VII
THE BRIDGE AND ITS EFFECT ON THE VACATION TRADE

It is from increased vacation trade that the counties of the Eastern
Shore will feel the greatest economic effect of the Bay Bridge. By the
shortening of the distance and the travel time to the Eastern Shore, the
Bay resorts, the many lovely inland areas, as well as the oceanside beaches
will attract many new vacationers.

DISTANCE AND TRAVEL TIME TO SHORE RESORTS

With the opening of the Bridge and the network of new highvrays,
residents of Washington and its environs may, within less than two hours,
reach the Eastern Shore bay resorts. Vacationers from Metropolitan Balti-
more may reach these same resorts via the Bridge within a period of about
an hour and a quarter, as compared with the present two hours via the ferry
and three and three quarter hours around the head of the Bay via Elkton.
The shortening of travel time will make these resorts considerably more
accessible and will undoubtedly result in great increases in the total niun-
ber of visitors to the area. Table 11 compares the distance and estimated
travel time from Washington and Baltimore to Queenstown in Queen Anne's
County via Elkton and via the Ferry and the new Bridge.

TABLE 11

DISTANCE AND TRAVEL TIME FROM
WASHINGTON, D. C, AND BALTIMORE TO QUEENSTOWN, MARYLAND

Distance to Queenstown Via Elkton Via Bay Crossing

From Washington, D. C, H5 miles 50 miles

From Baltimore 110 " A2 "

Travel Time to Queens toim Via Elkton Via Bay Ferry l/ Vin Rey Bridge

From Washington, D. C. A 3/4 hours 2 l/2 hoiirs 1 3/4 hours
From Baltimore 3 3/4 •' 2 '• 1 l/4 "

1/ Assuming an average of 45 minutes for crossing, including waiting time.

VJhile some traffic may be deterred by the probable bridge toll of
an average of $2 per car, except in periods of economic recession, the
saving of time will more than make up for the added expense.

Travel by vacationers to the Shore's oceanside will also be greatly
facilitated by the Bridge, Vacationers from Baltimore now find that travel-
ing to Ocean City via the ferry, a distance of about I4.O miles, takes about
four hours. This presupposes a wait at the ferry of approximately 20 minutes.
On week ends during the smnmer months, however, the increased traffic usually
lengthens total traveling time considerably. The Bridge should afford a time
saving of between 4O minutes and an hoiar depending on the wait at the ferry.
Travel time from both Baltimore and Washington to Ocean City should therefore
be reduced to betv/een three and three and a half hoiirs.

Travel time, as well as distance, from Washington and Baltimore to
such other popular beach resorts as Atlantic City, New Jersey, and Virginia
Beach, Virginia, will be considerably greater than to the Delmarva beaches.
With the delays of the Bay Ferry removed, Ocean City should attract a con-
siderably larger number of vacationers from Baltimore and Washington,

During the peak summer months many visitors from Baltimore have
preferred to go to the Shore the longer way, around the head of the Bay, via
Elkton. This route now takes between four and five hoiors. The Bridge will
affect a reduction in travel time, and a saving in gasoline for the users of
this route, although it will add the expense of the probable average toll
of ft2 per car,

ESTIMATES OF VACATIOF TRAFFIC

How many tourists now cross the Bay to spend their vacations on
the Eastern Shore? This is difficult to determine with any degree of accu-
racy, but some estimates can be made. Figures for Bay crossings show a

U7.

decided increase during the prak summer months. It can reasonably be as-
sumed that there is a normal year round pattern of ferry users. The increase
shown during the summer months can be attributed to vacationers. As noted
in Table 12, showing monthly ferry crossings for the two years ending

TABLE 12

KONTHLY TRAFFIC ON THE CHESAPEME BAY FERRY SYSTEM

OCTOBER 1%7 TO SEPTEMBER 19^9

Total Autonobile£3

Month

TOTAL A5^,266

Source: State Roads Commission,

389,777

Trucks and Busses

October 19A7

50,924

42,447

8.477

November

44,790

38,216

6,574

December

39,605

33,059

6,546

January 194-S

27,833

22,250

5,583

February

2^., 465

19; 223

5,2/.,2

March

39,966

32,608

7,358

TOTAL

227,583

187,803

39,780

April

44,059

36,226

7,833

May

55,649

47,016

8,633

Jvme

61,649

52,296

9,353

July

82,933

71,805

11,128

August

87,742

76,886

10,856

September

68.760

58,531

10.229

TOTAL

400,792

342,760

58,032

October

55,247

46,230

9,017

November

4?, 231

41,603

7,628

December

42,238

35,430

6,808

January 1949

38,796

32,412

6,384

February

35,968

29,798

6,170

March

45,992

^8,034

7,958

TOTAL

267,472

223,507

43,965

April

52,239

44,138

8.101

14ay

64,832

55,062

9,770

June

73,875

62,770

11A05

July

97,411

84,235

13,176

Augiast

94.166

82,021

12,145

September 1949

71,743

61,551

10,192

64,489

September 1949, traffic for the six-month periods April through September
was almost double that in the first half of each year. In 1948 total cross-
ings in the six-month period including the summer months exceeded the ear-
lier period by 175,000. In 1949 the excess increased to almost 200,000,
This traffic, assumed to be mainly vacationists, reporesented almost one
third of total airiual ferry crossings. To the 200,000 vacationists must be
added the many vehicles taking the o\'erland route. It has been estimated
with utmost conservatism that between 25,000 and 50,000 vehicles now use
this route. Adding these tvo figures we can say that about 240,000 vaca-
tion-bound vehicles travel to the Shore during the summer months.

In the discussion of total traffic expectation in the year follow-
ing the opening of the Bridge (Chapter 71), it was estimated that there
would be approximately 600,000 additional crossings by long-distance travel-
ers passing through the Eastern Shore and a like number of new visitors to
the area. Although vacationers now make up about one third of total annual
traffic, they will probably comprise a larger percentage of the increase in
traffic. Assuming that one half of the 600,000 new Bay crossings will carry
vacationers, there will be 300,000 additional vacaticn-bound vehicles
crossing the Bridge, With each crossing representing the coming as well as
the return trip, we can say that 150,000 additional vehicles will carry
vacationists to the Eastern Shore. Assuming three passengers per car in-
cluding the driver, this would mean an increase of 450,000 new visitors to
the Eastern Shore counties. This number should increase by between five and
ten per cent annually depending upon the extent to which the recreational
opportunities of the area are effectively publicized.

INCOME FROM VACATIONERS

In order to determine the income to be expected from this increase
in vacation trade, numerous studies of average vacation expenditures have

been reviewed. A Department cf Interior summary shows expenditures varying
from an average of $4,54 to $9.47 daily, depending upon the type of facili-
ties used as well as geographic location, l/ A Florida study indicated
expenditures varying from $4.50 to $7.50 daily with the lower figures spent
in tourist houses, motels, and rented rooms and the higher in hotels, 2/
Duration of vacations, as noted in these reports, varied from 7 days in
Oregon to 18 days in Idaho,

Vacations 'on the Eastern Shore vary from usual vacation travel.
In the first place, this is an area with many small, relatively inexpensive
facilities as well as some more elaborate hotels. In the second place, the
Shore's proximity to Baltimore and Washington inakes it especially attractive
as a week-end vacation area. For these reasons, it is advisable to assume
a reasonably low daily expenditure as well as a shorter average vacation.
With an average expenditure for these visitors of $5 per day, and a vacation
of between 7 and 12 days' duration, additional gross income accruing to the
eating and lodging facilities should approximate between $15,750,000 and
$27,000,000 annually. The annual increase of from five to ten per cent in
vacationists after 1953 should produce a further increase in gross annual
income to these facilities.

While anticipated generally throughout the area, these increases
will affect the Bay and oceansidc counties chiefly. Ocean City in Worcester
County can be expected to attract the largest number of visitors. Caroline
County, which is inland, v/ill probably witness little of this increased trade.

The amount that vacationists may be expected to spend in retail
stores of all kinds, and on recreation and entertainment may be estimated

1/ Op. cit., pp. 2-17.-

2/ Florida Power and Light Company, Evaluation of the Tourist Industry of
thq Halifax Area of Volusia County, Florida. 1947 (?), p. 21,

roughly. Since this is an area characterized by many small, relatively in-
expensive facilities, it would not be valid to assume expenditures which
compare with the $4 to $5 daily spent in an area like Mieuni Beach, Florida, l/
It does seem reasonable to assume a minimum expenditure of $1 daily. With
4.50,000 additional visitors, this would mean an expected increase in gross
income to these facilities of between ^3,150,000 and ^5,400,00^.

Studies of the national vacation trade indicate the growing selec-
tivity in tourist spending. The vacationist is spending less on souvenirs,
gaudy cabaret entertainment, and night clubs. He is picking his tourist
homes and resort hotels carefully on the basis of clean accommodations,
good food, and first rate service at reasonable rates. If increased vaca-
tion trade is to be attracted to the Shore, expansion of facilities should
be made with these factors in mind.

1/ Memorandum received from Statistical Department of American Hotel Associ-
tion referring to results of study prepai-ed by the Miami Beach Hotel
Ovrner? Association in 1949.

CH:VPTER VIII
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

1, Serving as a link in a projected interregional system of highways,
the Chesapeake Bay Bridge will attract thousands of long-distance
motorists through the counties of the Eastern Shore. Their expendi-
tures for food and lodging will produce an additional gross income
of at least $3,500,000 annually. Any expenditures which they make
for gasoline, autciobile supplies, and repairs will represent a
further increase in gross income,. To realize the full potential of
this income, traffic should be stimulated by joint efforts publiciz-
ing the entire interregional system of highways,

2, The Bridge should bring as ruany as 450,000 new vacationers to the
Eastern Shore counties in the first year of its operation. The
growth in vacation trade can be expected to produce an increase

in gross income to eating and lodging facilities of between §15,750,-
000 and $27,000,000 annually. Expenditures in retail stores and on
recreation and entertainment should add another $3,150,000 to $5,400»"
000 in gross income. These are minimum figures which can be greatly
increased by expanding and improving facilities to offer more and
better accomiriodations, better food, and first-rate service at
reasonable rates,

3, Retail trade on the Eastern Shore will be indirectly affected by any
increr.ses in income resulting from the expansion of agriculture or
industrial production. Gross income in retail trade vdll be more
directly affected by the expenditures of the many tourists and
vacationers traveling to the Shore over the new Bridge.

4., By shortening the distance and the travel time between Baltimore and
the Eastern Shore, the Bridge is likely to encourage the expansion
of the existing manufacturing establishments as well as the location
of new facilities on the Shore. This growth will be a long-tera
process,

5, The Bridge will have little effect in the short run on Eastern
Shore agriculture. It may produce some changes in the current
patterns of marketing agricultural produce. In addition, the ex-
panded tourist and vacation trade, as well as any increases in
population resulting from the grovrth of manufacturing and trade,
will increase the market for local produce,

6, The benefits accruing to agriculture, industry, and trade, and
service will be reflected in increased land values in the counties
of the Eastern Shore,

REFERENCES

Baltimore Magazine, Baltimore Association of Commerce, "Bay Bridge
Seen As Spur to More Trade Between Baltimore and Eastern Shore,"
November 19-C8, p. 15-16.

Coverdale and Colpitts, Report on Traffic and Revenues. Proposed
Chesapeake Bay Bridge. New York, September 15, 194.8 o

Coverdale and Colpitts, Traffic and Revenue Report, New Jersey
Turnpike. New York, September 1949.

Florida Power and Light Company, Evaluation of the TouriF;t Industry
of the Halifa:;: Ax-ea of Volusia County. Florida. 1947 (?).

J, E. Greiner Company, The Chesapeake Bay Bridge Engineering Report.
Baltimore, July 1, 1948.

Maryland Department of Employment Security, Unemployment Compensation
Division, Employment and Uagea in Covered Industry. Second
Quarter 1949.

Maryland State Planning Commission, Possible Economic Effects of
Chesapeake Bay Bridge on Eastern Shore Agriculture. Special Report
by VJilliam D. Clayton, 1949o

Maryland State Roads Commission, Financial Report For the Chesapeake
Bay Ferry System^ 1949.

Maryland State Tax Commission, Biennial Report. 1939, 1949,

Review of New Jersey Business. "The Influence of the New Jersey
Turnpike on the Future Development of the State," January 1950,
pp,2,10.

Sales Management, Inc., Survey of Buying Power. New York, May 1949 •

Standard Rate and Data Service, Inc., Consumer Markets.
Chicago, 1949-1950.

^0 HOT Cr'^r-.

CiRGULiiJi

Maryland & Rake Book Room

UNIV^KSn V O. MARYLAND UBRAES

College Park. Md.

J J|4 JU UC luu

J I a u

a3 1 1.300290059666

UHIV or 1*0 COLL6Gi ^WW

t)d t^OfT OR'

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Probable economic effects of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge on the Eastern Shore Counties of Maryland"

See other formats