Charles County, MD

DEMOGRAPHICS Charles Maryland % of MD Total County Ranking

Population, 2011a 149,130 5,828,289 2.56% 10

Population Change, 2000-2010b 21.6% 9.0% 2

Number of Households, 2011a 50,305 2,128,377 2.36% 11

Population Density (People / Square Mile), 2010b 320.16 594.77 12

Non-Hispanic, 2007-11 ACS Five-Year Estimatea 95.7% 92.1% 15

• White Alone 49.6% 55.2% 22

• Black or African American Alone 39.6% 29.0% 4

Hispanic (any race), 2007-11 ACS Five-Year Estimatea 4.3% 7.9% 9

Median Household Income, 2010c $92,135 72,419 4

Households Below 185% of Federal Poverty Level, 2011c,1 0.00% 10.47% 18

Unemployment, August 2013d 6.4% 6.7% 15

Self-Sufficiency Standard (2 Adults, 2 School-Age Children), 2012e,2 $71,042 (U) 5

Demographics

HEALTH STATISTICS Charles Maryland % of MD Total County Ranking

Overall Mortality / 100,000 Population (Age-Adjusted)l 777.8 732.50 10

Heart Disease Mortality / 100,000 Population (Age-Adjusted)l 201.0 181.6 8

Diabetes Mortality / 100,000 Population (Age-Adjusted)k 26.3 20.4 5

Rate of Obesitym 34.02% 27.61% 4

Rate of Diabetesm 9.77% 10.39% 14

Health Statistics

Food Systems ProfileThese county profiles present the data compiled by the Maryland Food System Map Project, at the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future. They are intended to be used for education, research, policy development, and community organizing purposes. For more information go to: www.mdfoodsystemmap.org.

CLF January 2014

2 Charles County Food Systems Profile

FOOD AVAILABILITY - FOOD STORES AND RESTAURANTSf Charles Maryland % of MD Total County Ranking

Total Number of Food Stores 70 3604 1.94% 11

• Number of Supermarkets 14 602 2.33% 11

• Supermarkets / 1,000 Population 0.09 0.10 17

• % Supermarkets (# Supermarkets / Total Food Stores) 20.00% 16.66% 12

• Number of Small Food Stores3 40 2516 1.59% 12

• Small Food Stores / 1,000 Population 0.27 0.43 17

• Number of Convenience Stores (Chains, Gas Stations, Drug Stores) 25 1169 2.14% 10

• Number of Superettes ("Mom and Pop" Stores, Corner Stores)4 14 1142 1.23% 12

• Number of International Food Stores* 1 205 0.49% 13

• Number of Other Food Stores5 16 486 3.29% 9

Number of Fast Food Chain Restaurants 54 1757 3.07% 11

• Fast Food Chain Restaurants / 1,000 Population 0.36 0.30 9

FOOD AVAILABILITY - NUTRITION ASSISTANCE Charles Maryland % of MD Total County Ranking

Average Number of Monthly SNAP Participants, 2011j 13,517 645,347 2.09% 11

Population Participating in SNAP, 2011j 9.2% 11.2% 16

SNAP Participation Among Low-Income Residentsj 84.5% (U) 2

Number of SNAP Authorized Storesk 72 3,559 2.02% 11

• Number of SNAP Authorized Stores / 1,000 population 0.49 0.62 18

Students Free-Lunch Eligible, 2009j,10 20.92% (U) 17

Number of Pantry & Free Meal Sitesf 16 974 1.64% 14

FOOD AVAILABILITY - FOOD ACCESS Charles Maryland % of MD Total County Ranking

Households without Vehiclea 3.4% 9.30% 22

Population in Designated Limited Supermarket Access Areag,6 20.57% 10.42% 5

Population Living in a USDA Food Deserth,7 18.98% 27.34% 16

Population that is Food Insecurei,8 10.2% 13.4% 12

Average Cost of a Meal ($)i,9 $2.77 (U) 15

Food Availability

14

25 14

1

16

Food Stores by Type

Supermarkets Convenience Superettes International Other

Charles County Food Systems Profile 3

AGRICULTUREn,11 - GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS Charles Maryland % of MD Total County Ranking

Total Number of Farms 418 12,849 3.25% 14

Acres of Land in Farms 52,147 2,051,756 2.54% 18

of Land in Farms 17.80% 33.03% 20

Average Farm Size (Acres) 125 160 13

Average Age of Primary Farm Operator 59.4 57.3 4

Female Primary Operator 17.22% 17.27% 12

Operators by Primary Occupation

• Farming 49.76% 48.85% 11

• Other 50.24% 51.15% 14

Agriculture

AGRICULTUREn - FARM TYPES Charles Maryland % of MD Total County Ranking

Farm Products Sold Directly - Number 69 1407 4.90% 8

Farm Products Sold Directly - Market Value $349,000 $21,220,000 1.64% 15

Number of USDA Certified Organic Farms 3 161 1.86% 16

Number of Farms Transitioning to USDA Certified Organic 1 107 0.93% 16

Dairy Farms - Number 21 663 3.17% 9

Dairy Farms - Market Value ($) $735,000 $192,426,000 0.38% 15

Beef Cattle Farms - Number 99 2526 3.92% 10

Beef Cattle Farms - Market Value ($) $672,000 $58,293,000 1.15% 14

Oilseed & Grain Farms - Number 56 2049 2.73% 15

Oilseed & Grain Farms - Market Value ($) $3,286,000 $307,944,000 1.07% 17

Hog Farms - Number 15 412 3.64% 11

Hog Farms - Market Value ($) $47,000 (D) (U) 11

Fruit, Tree Nuts & Berries - Number 12 472 2.54% 14

Fruit, Tree Nuts & Berries - Market Value ($) $116,000 $19,393,000 0.60% 18

Vegetables, Melons, Potatoes, & Sweet Potatoes - Number 51 940 5.43% 7

Vegetables, Melons, Potatoes, & Sweet Potatoes - ($) $939,000 $56,394,000 1.67% 15

Poultry Farms (Broiler) - Number 5 808 0.62% 16

Poultry Farms (Layer) - Number 52 1229 4.23% 10

Poultry Farms (Broiler & Layer) - Market Value ($) $52,000 $903,531,000 0.01% 14

$735,000

$672,000

$3,286,000

$47,000

$116,000

$939,000

$52,000

Dairy

Beef Cattle

Oilseed & Grain

Hog

Fruits

Vegetables

Poultry

Market Value by Farm Type

4 Charles County Food Systems Profile

AGRICULTURE - LOCAL FOOD Charles Maryland % of MD Total County Ranking

Number of Farmers Markets, 2013p 5 163 3.07% 9

Number of Agritourism Operationsn 7 231 3.03% 15

Average $ / Agritourism Operationn $11,429 $27,216 9

Total Number of Farms Selling Locally, 2012f,19 29 1,015 2.86% 16

• Farms that are USDA Certified Organic 2 107 1.87% 16

• Farms that sell at Farmers Markets 10 354 2.82% 15

• Farms that Sell Through CSAs 3 119 2.52% 11

• Dairy Farms that Sell Locally 1 88 1.14% 14

• Livestock & Poultry Farms that Sell Locally 15 386 3.89% 9

AGRICULTUREn - LARGE-SCALE LIVESTOCK Charles Maryland % of MD Total County Ranking

Number of Broiler Chicken CAFOs15* 0 255 0.00% 9

Number of Broiler Chicken MAFOs16* 0 16 0.00% 6

Number of Dairy Cattle CAFOs17* 0 4 0.00% 5

Number of Hog CAFOs18* 0 1 0.00% 2

AGRICULTUREn - ECONOMICS Charles Maryland % of MD Total County Ranking

Number of Small Farms (Market Value <$50,000) 381 10,021 3.80% 10

Number of Mid-Sized Farms ($50,000 - $499,999)12 35 1,980 1.77% 19

Number of Large Farms ($500,000 or more) 2 970 0.21% 21

Total Market Value of Agricultural Products Sold $8,898,000 $1,835,090,000 0.48% 21

• Average Per Farm $21,287 $142,987 21

Government Payouts - Total Federal Dollars $487,000 $33,386,000 1.46% 17

• Average Per Farm Receiving Funds $5,356 $7,277 14

Total Number of Hired Workers (Excludes Contract Labor)13 226 14,938 1.51% 21

Total Number of Farms with Migrant Labor14 6 258 2.33% 16

381

35

2

Farms by Size (by Market Value)

Small Farms Mid-Sized Farms Large Farms

Charles County Food Systems Profile 5

ENVIRONMENT - LAND PRESERVATION Charles Maryland % of MD Total County Ranking

Maryland DNR and Conservation Easements, Total Acreageq,21 19,623.55 541,876.73 3.62% 9

MALPF Easements, Total Acreager,22 5,671.00 279,223.00 2.03% 16

Maryland Environmental Trust Easements, Total Acreageq,23 7,002.63 128,238.77 5.46% 7

Maryland Rural Legacy24 Properties, Total Acreageq 2,785.09 77,978.01 3.57% 13

Maryland Rural Legacy Areas, Total Acreageq 30,860.00 885,463.97 3.49% 13

ENVIRONMENT - BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICESp,25 Charles Maryland % of MD Total County Ranking

Cover Crops (Acres/Year) 5,158.00 415,437.14 1.24% 16

Enhanced Nutrient Management on Pasture (Acres/Year) 1,702.20 85,548.00 1.99% 12

Soil Conservation and Water Quality Plans (Acres/Year) 14,867.20 911,237.30 1.63% 17

ENVIRONMENT - AIR AND WATER QUALITY Charles Maryland % of MD Total County Ranking

Ammonia26 from Fertilizer Application (Tons)s 32.04 5,890.13 0.54% 23

Ammonia from Livestock Waste (Tons)s 207.44 25,957.99 0.80% 22

Airborne PM2.5 from Crop and Livestock Dust (Tons)s,27 60.55 2,829.98 2.14% 16

Total Number of Watershedsq,28 10 123 8.13% 7

• Number in Good Health* 0 2 0.00% 4

• Number in Fair Health 9 59 15.25% 1

• Number in Poor Health 1 62 1.61% 20

Environment

PROCESSING AND DISTRIBUTIONf,20 Charles Maryland % of MD Total County Ranking

Total Number of Food Processing Facilities* 21 1111 1.89% 20

Number of Canneries 1 12 8.33% 4

Number of Facilities that Process Dairy 3 130 2.31% 11

Number of Facilities that Process Eggs 14 358 3.91% 10

Number of Facilities that Process Seafood 0 196 0.00% 21

Number of Facilities that Process Meat 3 199 1.51% 19

Animal Slaughter Facilities* 1 51 1.96% 10

Number of Facilities that Slaughter Hogs 0 12 0.00% 8

Number of Facilities that Slaughter Cattle 0 17 0.00% 9

Number of Facilities that Slaughter Poultry 1 34 2.94% 10

Distribution and Storage Facilities* 12 727 1.65% 16

Number of Distributors that Source Locally 1 65 1.54% 13

Processing and Distribution

0

9

1

Watershed Health

Good Health Fair Health Poor Health

6 | Charles County Food Systems Profile

The data sources for the Maryland Food System County Profiles are as follows: (a) The American Community Survey, 2011;(b) The United States Census, 2010; (c) ESRI Updated Demographics, 2010; (d) Maryland Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2013; (e) Center for Women’s Welfare, 2012; (f) CLF’s Maryland Food System Map Project, 2013; (g) The Reinvestment Fund, 2011; (h) USDA Food Access Research Atlas, 2013; (i) Feeding America, 2011; (j) Maryland Hunger Solutions, 2012; (K) USDA Food and Nutrition Service SNAP Retailer Locator(l) Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, 2011; (m) Maryland Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2011; (n) USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2007; (o) Maryland Department of the Environment, 2012; (p) Maryland Department of Agriculture, 2013; (q) Maryland Department of Natural Resources, 2010; (r) Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation, 2002; (s) United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2008.

Footnotes1. 185% of the Federal Poverty Level, an eligibility criterion for federal food supplement programs, varies by

household size. For an individual in 2013, it is $21,256.56, and for a family of 4, it is $43,567.56. 2. The Self-Sufficiency Standard determines the amount of income required for working families to meet

basic needs at a minimally adequate level, taking into account family composition, ages of children, and geographic differences in costs. Study conducted by the Center for Women’s Welfare.

3. The “Small Food Stores” category in this chart includes small-format stores in the following categories: convenience stores (gas station and chain stores), superettes (natural/gourmet, small groceries, corner stores, and behind-glass corner stores), and international food stores.

4. “Superettes,” sometimes called “mom & pop” stores or corner stores, carry a basic, narrow selection of food items. They tend to have few if any service departments, and have annual food sales of less than $2 million.

5. The “Other Food Stores” category in this chart include Conventional Club stores (i.e. BJ’s), Military Com-missaries, Drug Stores (i.e. Walgreens, CVS), Supercenters (i.e. Wal-Mart), dollar stores, farm markets, and public markets.

6. Limited Supermarket Access (LSA) areas were developed by The Reinvestment Fund (TRF). They are areas where residents travel longer distances to reach a supermarket when compared to the average distance traveled of non-low/moderate income areas.

7. USDA Food Deserts are defined as low-income census tracts where residents are >0.5 miles (urban) or >10 miles (rural) from the nearest supermarket.

8. USDA defines food security as having “consistent, dependable access to enough food for an active, healthy life for all household members.” Households that are food insecure do not have consistent, dependable access due to a lack of money and other resources.

9. The average dollar amount spent on food per week by food secure individuals is divided by 21 (3 meals per day x 7 days per week) weighted by the “cost-of-food index” to derive a localized estimate. Food expendi-tures for food secure individuals were used to ensure that the result best reflected the cost of an adequate diet.

10. The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) provides per meal cash reimbursements to schools as an entitle-ment to provide nutritious meals to children. Student eligibility is dependent on household income level.

11. All data in the “Agriculture” sections are sourced from the USDA National Agriculture Statistics Survey 2007 Census of Agriculture, unless otherwise noted.

12. Agriculture of the Middle (AOTM) encompasses a spectrum of farms and ranches that are declining because they are too small to be served well by commodity markets and too large to be served well by direct markets. Most farms are in the $50,000-$500,000 range of gross sales. See agofthemiddle.org for more information.

13. Data are for total hired farm workers, including paid family members. Data exclude contract laborers.14. A migrant farm worker is a farm worker whose employment required travel that prevented the worker from

returning to his/her permanent place of residence on the same day.15. A Confined Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) is a medium or large Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) that

discharges or “proposes to discharge” manure, litter, or process wastewater. “Proposes to discharge” means that your facility is designed, constructed, operated, or maintained, such that a discharge to surface waters of the State WILL occur. Broiler Chicken CAFO with liquid manure ranges: medium = 9,000-29,999 birds/farm, large = >30,000 birds/farm. Broiler Chickens CAFO with dry manure ranges: medium = 37,500-124,999 birds/farm or <100,000 ft2, large = >125,000 birds/farm or ≥100,000 ft2.

16. A Maryland Animal Feeding Operation (MAFO) is a large animal feeding operation that does not discharge or “propose to discharge” manure, litter, or process wastewater.

17. Dairy Cattle CAFO ranges: medium = 200-699 animals/farm, large = 700+ animals/farm. 18. Hog CAFO ranges: 750 or more animals/farm, dependent on weight of animals.19. Farms that grow and sell food locally in some manner. The list is derived from online research, last updated

in spring 2012. The list is not entirely comprehensive, as not all local farms have information available on the Internet.

20. Categories of food processing facilities, slaughter facilities, and distribution and storage facilities are neither mutually exclusive nor an exhaustive list or every possible type of facility.

21. A “Deed of Conservation Easement” is a legal agreement between a landowner and a land trust (such as Maryland Environmental Trust, within Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR)), which restricts the future uses of the landowner’s property. It applies to all future owners of the property and often limits such things as the amount of subdivision, or the number of houses that may be built.

22. The Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation (MALPF) purchases agricultural preservation easements that forever restrict development on prime farmland and woodland.

23. The Maryland Environmental Trust is a statewide land trust with a mission to provide landowners with information and tools to permanently protect natural, historic and scenic resources in the state.

24. Maryland’s Rural Legacy Program provides funding to preserve large, contiguous tracts of land and to en-hance natural resource, agricultural, forestry and environmental protection while supporting a sustainable land base for natural resource based industries.

25. The Maryland Department of Agriculture collects data on Best Management Practices for conservation, 3 of which are listed below, as part of an effort to restore the health of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.

26. Ammonia (NH3) is a chemical present in the chemical fertilizers used in agriculture. Ammonia is also produced naturally from decomposition of organic matter, including plants, animals and animal wastes.

27. Data for crop and livestock dust emissions of Particulate Matter <2.5 microns (PM2.5).28. The number of watersheds comprises all watersheds present in the county, including those that cross

county borders.

Symbols(D) Data withheld to avoid disclosing data for individual farms (Census of Agriculture only)(U) Data unavailable * Many Maryland counties do not have any data or locations in this category, making the County Ranking for this category deceptively high for counties that have a value of 0. For example, there are only 4 dairy cow CAFOs in Maryland so any county with 0 CAFOs is tied for 5th place.