Bay Daily

A Riot of Life in a River Reborn

"Grrrr!  Give me that oyster!"

"I've had just about enough of you, toadfish. That's my oyster."

Pictured here is Virginia oyster farmer Cam Chalmers, distracted by a tenacious fish as he lifts cages brimming with fat oysters out of the Lynnhaven River near Virginia Beach.

I went out onto the river with Cam yesterday to get a sense of why aquaculture is succeeding in the Lynnhaven River and across Virginia, where the number of farmed oysters has risen ten fold over the last five years.

One thing that is encouraging about the Lynnhaven, in particular, is that bacterial pollution in the river has dropped substantially over the last eight years. This is in part because Virginia Beach cut down on sewage leaks and septic tank leaks into the waterway.  The state also imposed a "no discharge zone" for boats, meaning they can't dump human waste.  And citizens groups, especially Lynnhaven River NOW and Chesapeake Bay Foundation, have worked to educate homeowners about the need to pick up after their pets and take other steps to reduce runoff pollution.

Compromise on Stormwater Pollution Regulations

Maryland lawmakers and developers have reached a compromise in a battle over new stormwater control rules. The agreement heads off legislation that would have gutted the new regulations, but allows the Maryland Department of the Environment to “grandfather” some residential and commercial developments already in the planning stages, according to a report in The Baltimore Sun.

"Not everybody's going to be happy," said Del. Maggie L. McIntosh, chairwoman of the House Environmental Matters Committee. But she added, "We have not changed any of the specifications within those regulations - we've just allowed a transition period. And we have, I think, given a little bit more consideration to redevelopment projects."

Do Bay Cleanup 'Milestones' Mean Anything?

After blowing a second deadline –- this year, 2010 -- for cleaning up the Chesapeake Bay, Maryland, Virginia and Pennsylvania promised to do better. The new system for the Bay area states works like this. Instead of 10-year goals for reducing pollution (which they keep missing, badly) they have created  a series of two year “milestones” that they say are more achievable.

Accountability is the key with these new milestones. Shorter deadlines mean that the same politicians making the promises are in office when the deadline arrives, so there is no dodging the question of who is responsible.

Okay, so here’s our first accountability moment.  In Maryland, a centerpiece of the state’s efforts to reduce runoff pollution is the Chesapeake Bay Trust Fund. It was created by the Governor and General Assembly in 2007 and was supposed to provide a dedicated revenue stream of $50 million a year from rental car  and motor vehicle fuel taxes to pay for planting trees along streams on farms, improving urban stormwater systems, and taking other steps to filter pollutants out of rainwater before it flows into Chesapeake Bay tributaries.

The Terrorism Defense Center Next Door

When you see this photo, what do you think should be going on here?  You see farmland -- and so you might think that families here in Ruthsburg, on Maryland's Eastern Shore, should keep working the land, as they have for generations.  You see a sign pointing to nearby Tuckahoe State Park -- and so you might think about canoeing and hiking.

What does not appear in this photo is the federal government's proposal for this land: a 2,000 acre terrorism defense training center, complete with gun-firing ranges,  urban-style environments where mock terrorist assaults will be staged, and tracks where guards will be trained to evade roadside bombs.

The State Department's proposed Foreign Affairs Security Training Center is raising opposition from a lot of local residents in Queen Anne's County, because it is not consistent with county, state or federal plans for the area.  It would take about 2,000 acres of productive farmland out of production. It would create an intensive, perhaps loud, more than $70 million development project in a quiet rural area -- clashing with Maryland's "smart growth" policies.

Lawsuit Filed Over Waste Pile

Activists filed a lawsuit yesterday in the case of the controversial waste pile on a poultry farm outside Berlin on Maryland's Eastern Shore. 

Weed Killer in the Rain... Eggs in the Male Frogs

Atrazine is one of the most common weed-killers in the world, with about 80 million pounds sprayed each year in the United States alone. So it’s virtually everywhere – in streams, rivers, lakes, the Chesapeake Bay. It’s even in rain.

The problem with this is that the herbicide may also be causing sexual deformities in frogs that might be contributing to global declines in amphibian populations, according to a new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.

The study by Dr. Tyrone B. Hayes of the University of California, Berkeley, found that male frogs that have contact with atrazine at trace levels found commonly in streams had their hormone and sexual functioning disrupted.

“Atrazine exposed males were both demasculated (chemically castrated) and completely feminized as adults,” the report says.  “Ten percent of the exposed genetic males developed into functional females that copulated with unexposed males and produced viable eggs."

Justice in a Swamp: 1,500 Investigations Dropped

Clean water justice is mired in the mud because of a pair of bad U.S. Supreme Court decisions.

More than 1,500 major pollution investigations by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have been discontinued or shelved over the last four years, according to a report in this morning’s New York Times.

The reason: high court decisions in two cases – Rapanos v United States in 2006 and Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County vs. United States in 2001 – concluded that the federal Clean Water Act does not apply to many waters of the United States. 

As a result, as many as 45 percent of major polluters in the U.S. might now be either outside EPA’s reach or in areas where proving jurisdiction to enforce water pollution cases is “overwhelmingly difficult,” according to the Times.

What's On Tap? The Halliburton Loophole

It’s time to test the water, for Norma’s sake.

The federal Environmental Protection Agency announced yesterday that it hopes to begin a study this year on the effects of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water supplies.

This research can’t begin soon enough in the Marcellus shale region of Pennsylvania, New York, Maryland and West Virginia, which has experienced a multiplication of natural gas drilling wells using hydraulic fracturing. “Fracking” is technique in which drilling companies pump millions of gallons of water laced with chemicals into the ground to fracture rock and release natural gas into pipes.

I took a trip this fall up to Dimock, Pennsylvania, to interview several residents whose wells had been contaminated with methane by drilling rigs that now surround their rural town. One woman, Norma Fiorentino (pictured above), a retired nurse and widow, reported that the water well in her front yard blew up last year because of leaking methane. She said her tap water ran black and smelled of diesel fuel, and she’s been drinking bottled water since.

Think, Baby, Think. Is Drilling Really Green?

Is natural gas environmentally virtuous because burning it creates less air pollution than coal?

Or is it greener to be skeptical about the recent surge in gas drilling in the Chesapeake region, because of its potential to create water pollution and contaminated drinking water wells?

It’s a complex question that is sparking hot debate between environmentalists. And it is an important discussion for our region, because of the hundreds of wells being dug in a formation of black rock called the Marcellus shale that lies under New York state, Pennsylvania, Western Maryland, and West Virginia.

$13 Million More for Bay Program. But What About More Accountability?

Federal funding in the Chesapeake Bay cleanup program may increase by $13 million next year. This is good news. But more than just money, this taxpayer is demanding more accountability –- to make sure my family's investments in the Bay result in real pollution reductions, not just  hot air.

Do you agree? Who is backing these checks for the Bay program, anyway?  You and me.

During testimony today before the Senate  Committee on Environment and Public Works, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said that the Chesapeake Bay Program – a federally-led partnership with Bay  area states – will receive $63 million in the fiscal year starting on October 1 in President Barack Obama’s proposed budget.

This is an increase from about $50 million this year, which was also up from approximately $40 million the year before. Considering the even greater economic benefits that would flow from a restored Chesapeake Bay, Congress should support the President’s proposed increase – and invest even more in clean water.