After decades of effort, the voluntary, collaborative approach to restoring the health and vitality of the Chesapeake Bay— the largest estuary in the United States—has not worked and, in fact, is failing. A diverse group of 57 senior scientists and policymakers have joined forces to save the Bay. This is our plan.

There is no content to display.

Category Archives: Action Plan

The Chesapeake Bay Restoration is in Deep Trouble

The Chesapeake Bay Restoration is in Deep Trouble

Gerald Winegrad: The Chesapeake Bay restoration is in deep trouble

Chesapeake Bay restoration efforts have reached their lowest ebb.  The wheels are coming off the commitments by federal and state governments to get the job done and assure a flourishing ecological treasure.

When I joined 700 other hopeful bay caretakers at the signing of the first Bay Restoration Agreement in Virginia in 1983, I was optimistic we would succeed in restoring the bay. If the bright-eyed, full of hope leaders back in 1983 had envisioned a nightmare scenario for the Bay’s future, we are in it now!

Yes, absolutely, the bay is better off than it would have been without these efforts.  But we are very far from a restored Chesapeake with excessive flows of nutrients (phosphorus and nitrogen) from farms, urban stormwater runoff, septic tanks, and wastewater treatment plants. Huge amounts of sediment still flow from farms and stormwater runoff.

Here are results of the flagging efforts to control pollutants:

Flesh-Eating Diseases. Dinoflagellates such as pfiesteria flourish proliferate and grow toxic fueled by excess nutrients. Contact with bay water can lead to flesh-eating infections, loss of limbs, and even deaths.  I have seen the legs of men being eaten from the inside from water contact in the Severn and South Rivers.

Mahogany Tide.  This spring’s mahogany tide was more widespread and intense because of excess nutrients. As the algae died, oxygen-deprived water led to tens of thousands dead fish of 12 species — a harbinger of worse to come this summer?

Oysters.  Populations collapsed of this keystone species necessary to filter-cleanse bay waters to 1% of historic levels while the Maryland Department of Natural Resources and the General Assembly dither and allow continued harvest.

Crabs. The 2020 winter survey documented a 32% decline in crabs from 2019 down to only 18% of 1990 numbers. Juvenile crabs dropped 42%  to 38% of 1990 numbers. Females declined to only two-thirds of the goal. At $400 a bushel harvest accelerates unabated.

Rockfish. Our state fish is in trouble as substantial overfishing has been occurring for years. The annual survey of young rockfish in 2019 was well below the 66-year average, the 3rd lowest in 11 years. And yet DNR has failed to meaningfully restrict commercial harvest.

Soft clams, shad, sturgeon.  All are collapsed populations with only clams still harvested.  Shad fishing was shut down in 1980 with little recovery.  Both sturgeon species are listed federally as endangered.

Bay grasses. Bay grasses, one of the best indicators of bay health, declined last year by 33%, the largest drop since surveys began in 1986.  These underwater grass beds are critical for juvenile blue crabs and waterfowl food and pump oxygen into water, trap sediment and buffer shorelines from erosion. Bay states vowed to reach 185,000 acres by 2010 but are at only 66,400 acres. There may have once been 600,000 acres.

Water quality declines. The University of Maryland Center for Environmental Studies annual 2019 Bay Health Report dropped to a C-, the second consecutive decline and the lowest grade since 2011. Most of the bay’s waters do not meet basic Clean Water Act requirements.

The responses by policymakers to this disturbing news: blame the weather, cyclical variations, or the other states or the EPA. They tout any positive signs and try to sugar-coat the bad news to keep the money flowing to the folks steering this sinking ship. This is in lieu of forcefully addressing overfishing and the largest pollution source—agriculture—and cracking down on urban stormwater runoff and septic tank pollution.

The Trump administration response has been to try to shut down the Bay Program, force the EPA to turn critical Clean Water Act pollution limits into voluntary goals, and prevent the EPA from enforcing existing laws.

Maryland, Virginia, and DC are suing EPA as Pennsylvania and New York failed to develop required plans to achieve 2025 restoration goals. Unmentioned is that Maryland and Virginia failed to meet their mandated nitrogen reductions in 2017 without any punitive EPA actions. Both states are unlikely to meet their 2025 nitrogen limits without manipulating tradeoffs.

Making matters worse is the blatant Green Washing by top governmental leaders like Gov. Larry Hogan who declared last year that “we practiced skilled stewardship of the environment, which resulted in a Chesapeake Bay that is cleaner than it has been in recorded history.”

Some advocacy groups, scientists, and federal and state agencies also participate in Green Washing by falsely praising the status quo to bring funding and prestige.

I’m angry and disheartened at the lack of leadership and courage to make the bold changes needed.  The bay is part of our heritage and our culture. I must speak out, being the skunk at the garden party, and hope that true warriors will join the fight for the bay.

Gerald Winegrad represented the greater Annapolis area in the Legislature for 16 years, where he championed efforts to restore the Chesapeake Bay. He served on the tri-State Chesapeake Bay Commission and taught graduate courses in bay restoration and wildlife management he authored. Contact him at gwwabc@comcast.net.

Land Use Threatens Chesapeake Bay and Quality of Life

Land Use Threatens Chesapeake Bay and Quality of Life

After 50 years of environmental advocacy, I can state unequivocally that the most abused power in the U.S. is the authority over land use given local authorities. Through the centuries, too many local officials have been blinded by greed including campaign contributions, and in rarer cases, bribes, as well as by seeking development at any cost as a goal.Continue Reading

Gerald Winegrad: Bay cleanup is mired in a Chesapeake deadzone

Gerald Winegrad: Bay cleanup is mired in a Chesapeake deadzone

The EPA Bay Program was prodded by Congress in 2006 to begin issuing detailed annual progress reports and assessments with excellent data and no-holds-bar reporting of both failures and successes. This has ended. The EPA assessment is part of the Green Washing engaged in by governors, legislators, and even some in the conservation community to declare success when there is none.Continue Reading

Code red: for the Chesapeake Bay

Code red: for the Chesapeake Bay

In December 1983, 35 years ago, the bay states and EPA solemnly pledged to restore the bay in signing the first Bay Agreement. President Ronald Reagan budgeted $40 million for the new Bay Program over four years and said in his 1984 State of the Union that: “We will begin the long, necessary effort to clean up a productive recreational area and a special national resource — the Chesapeake Bay.”
These lofty expectations may be crushed…
Continue Reading

Draft of new Bay agreement undermines cleanup

Our group found serious shortcomings in the draft of the first Bay agreement in 14 years, the first after the mandatory adoption of the pollution diet under the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load and state watershed implementation plans. We fear the current draft may undermine, not advance, Bay cleanup efforts. Continue Reading

Bay agreement efforts are foundering

If, in 1983, we were to create a nightmare scenario for the bay, this would be it — we are living that nightmare! The cause of this decline is attributable to the failure to properly address pollutants from developed land — stormwater runoff — and from agricultural operations. About 90 percent of bay waters remain polluted in violation of the Clean Water ActContinue Reading