Chesapeake Bay Action Plan
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.
Smart Growth Vs. Dumb Zoning
(Posted by Bob Gallagher.)
The top two sources of pollution in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries are runoff from agriculture and urban and suburban development. On the Western Shore of Maryland, where I live, the biggest source is development.
The principles of managed growth or smart growth can reduce the polluting effects of development by concentrating development where infrastructure can eliminate, reduce or mitigate their effects. For example, modern waste water treatment results in far less pollution than septic systems do. Building in areas that have excess capacity of schools and roads also reduces pollution. And, prohibiting development in wetlands, flood plains and other sensitive areas protects bay water quality.
Pew Report: Big Chicken and Industrial Pollution
(Posed by Sarah Meyers.) Last week, Pew Environment Group released a report entitled Big Chicken: Pollution and Industrial Poultry Production in America. The report draws on data from the USDA going back to 1950 and explores the history, growth, and impact of the chicken industry within the “Broiler Belt.” The production of broilers has increased…
Helping Local Officials Crack the WIP
(Posted by Mary Ann Lisanti.)
Two decades ago, when the Chesapeake Bay restoration effort began, the leadership of local officials was viewed as nice, but not essential. Times have changed. Today, with the deadline to develop local Watershed Implementation Plans looming, it’s clear that when it comes to improving the health of our local rivers and streams, and ultimately the Chesapeake Bay, the elected leaders of town and county governments and the appointed leaders of local soil conservation, storm water, and planning districts throughout the Chesapeake watershed will be the ones to make it happen.
However, the feedback coming from local government is simply this: They need information, direction, and flexibility in choosing approaches, otherwise budget challenges will keep them from reaching their goals.
A Chemical Reaction
For those who dream of a chemical-free Cheasapeake Bay, this guest post from Safelawns.org founder Paul Tukey demonstrates that dreams can, in fact, come true.
The topic of what, exactly, facilitates real change in human habits has been the focus of behavioral scientists, political pundits and clever marketers for as long as we’ve had a mature free market system in North America. In the non-profit world, where resources are scarce, almost by definition, we’re constantly looking for ways to get our message its proverbial 15 minutes in the limelight. Often, we’re lucky to grab 15 seconds of someone’s attention, so our message better damn well be clear.
At SafeLawns.org, founded in Maine and Washington, D.C., in 2006 to reduce the toxic load on our backyard lawns, business and college campuses and public parks, we’ve taken many of our cues from a lone Canadian doctor. A quarter century ago, when Dr. June Irwin, a dermatologist, heard the renowned author and activist Gordon Sinclair say that “letters to the editor are free,” she took it to heart.
Is It Illegal to Restore the Bay?
(Posted by Erik Michelson.)
After centuries of unregulated wetland filling, land clearing, and shoreline modification, over the course of the past several decades, federal, state, and local regulations have been put in place ostensibly to reverse the trend of the declining health of the country’s waterways. As a rule, these have taken the form of a sequence of three options: “avoid, minimize, mitigate.” So, in the context of a development project, impacts to wetlands or trees in the critical area buffer should be avoided if at all possible, and if not avoided, minimized. Any impacts that do occur, should either be mitigated, or offset, preferably on the same site where they originally occurred, but if not there, somewhere else in the same jurisdiction.
Putting the ‘Action’ in Chesapeake Bay ‘Action’ Plan
Here is some coverage from our June 30, 2011, action in the Anacostia River protesting the 28th year of not meeting the Clean Water Act deadline. We got some terrific media coverage. Thanks to all who came out! Here’s hoping that we won’t see a 29th year.
(Courtesy Lauren Gentile):
July 1, 1983
(Posted by Jeanne McCann.)
That’s the date by which the Clean Water Act promised that America’s waterways would be fishable and swimmable.
It’s 28 years since that deadline came and went. To bring attention to this anniverary, a group of hardy souls plunged into the murky waters of the Anacostia River to protest the continued failure to make good on that promise.
Scientists, Lawmakers To Take the Plunge for Clean Water
(Posted by Jeanne McCann.)
A small group of the scientists, lawmakers, and other concerned citizens behind this blog are planning to jump into the Anacostia River this coming Thursday, June 30, 10 a.m., to mark the passing of yet another year that we as a nation have failed to meet the deadline set by the Clean Water Act to have all rivers fishable and swimmable by July 1, 1983.
We are senior Chesapeake Bay scientists and policymakers from Maryland, Virginia and Pennsylvania who have concluded that after decades of effort, the voluntary, collaborative approach to restoring the health and vitality of the largest estuary in the United States has not worked and, in fact, is failing. Our group unanimously recommends that all states draining into the Chesapeake Bay adopt our 25 action items in their Watershed Implementation Plans (WIP) and implement them to improve the Bay’s water quality and to meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act.
Sign up for news & updates from Patuxent Riverkeeper