Save the Bay - Winter 2015

The news-grabbing harmful algal bloom that closed the harvest of some fisheries from California to Washington State reminds us that threats to water quality also threaten our own human health.

Too much nitrogen and phosphorus pollution causes algae to explode, resulting in dangerous blooms.

In the Chesapeake Bay region, scientists have known for years how much pollution must be reduced to restore the health of our waterways. Unfortunately, all of the voluntary agreements signed by the Bay states since 1983 have missed the mark. And not by an inch but by a mile.

Today, we have a new, science-based clean-up plan that has all the ingredients of success. It will protect the environment and human health. It is called the Chesapeake Clean Water Blueprint, and it is a true win-win.

In December 2010, the Bay jurisdictions and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced this new initiative. There are pollution limits that will restore water quality in local rivers, streams, and the Chesapeake Bay. The states developed individual plans to achieve those limits. In addition, the states committed to take specific actions in two-year increments called milestones. Together, the limits, plans, milestones, and accountability constitute what many consider the best hope for clean water in the nation today.

The state plans require pollution reduction
from all sources—sewage treatment plants,
And yet the Blueprint is opposed by the Amer-
ican Farm Bureau Federation, the National
Pork Producers Council, the National
Association of Homebuilders, and others.
They have repeatedly litigated to try to stop
it, and now they want the U.S. Supreme
Court to kill it, having lost in federal district
court and again on appeal (see page 7). They
are spending their money on lawsuits, not
cleanup, and forcing the tax payer to contin-
ue to fund the government’s defense of the
Clean Water Act. A true lose-lose.

The Farm Bureau and other plaintiffs contend that the Clean Water Blueprint is an EPA over-reach which micromanages state and local land-use decisions. The facts are different. Each state has assessed its pollution sources and control methods and put in place plans that make the most sense for that state’s needs and resources. It is a true regional partnership.

Maryland and Virginia are largely on target, but Pennsylvania is lagging far behind. With more freshwater entering the Bay from the Commonwealth than any other state, it is critical for Pennsylvania to accelerate efforts. The benefits will be cleaner streams and rivers in Pennsylvania, and improved water quality downstream. Another win-win.

Perhaps equally important, a 2014 peer-reviewed economic analysis commissioned by CBF found that fully implementing the Blueprint will create $22 billion in benefits to the region annually. Yes, another win-win.

The national lobbying associations suing to kill the Blueprint claim that if we succeed in achieving clean water here in the Bay states, similar efforts may spring up in other parts of the country. Farm Bureau General Counsel Ellen Steen actually said, “From the beginning, this was designed as a model that would be followed around the country.” We reject that argument. To us, it sounds a lot like lose-lose. Save the legal fee expenditures, and work with us and so many of your farmer members in Chesapeake Country to achieve a healthy environmental and economic legacy for all.