903F99007
A
CITIZEN'S
GUIDE
to the
Chesapeake Bay Program's
1999
Executive
Council
Meeting
The Renewed Agreement
DECEMBER 8, 1999
-------
•Ml
The Renewed Agreement
Welcome to the Chesapeake Bay Program's 1999 Executive Council Meeting
What is the Chesapeake Bay Program?
Established in 1983 under the historic Chesapeake Bay Agreement, the Bay Program is the
partnership among Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania, the District of Columbia, the Chesapeake
Bay Commission, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that's restoring and protecting
the Bay.
What is the Chesapeake Executive Council?
The Executive Council is the Bay Program's governing body and includes the top executives
from each jurisdiction, the chair of the Bay Commission and the administrator of the E.P.A. The
members of the 1999 Executive Council are Maryland Governor Parris N. Glendening, chair;
Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge; Virginia Governor James Gilmore III; District of Columbia
Mayor Anthony A. Williams; Pennsylvania Representative Arthur D. Hershey, chair of the
Chesapeake Bay Commission; and E.P.A. Administrator Carol M. Browner. The Executive
Council establishes the policy direction for the restoration and protection of the Bay and its
living resources, setting goals and policy through agreements,-amendments and directives.
What's happening at the 1999 Executive Council Meeting?
This year, the Executive Council is releasing the first public draft of the new Chesapeake 2000
agreement for review by the citizens of the region. The renewed agreement will define the
priority goals and commitments for the Bay effort to take place between 2000 and 2010. This
draft is the third in a series of agreements signed since 1983. The first Chesapeake Bay
Agreement established the Bay Program partnership. The second Chesapeake Bay Agreement,
adopted in 1987 and amended in 1992, established the overall plan and framework for the
restoration and protection of the Bay. In 1998, the Executive Council directed the Bay Program
partners to renew the agreement since many of the original goals and commitments were indexed
to the year 2000. Also, many of the original restoration milestones have been met.
CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM
www.chesapeakebay.net
1-800-YOUR BAY
-------
Citizen's Guide to the Chesapeake Bay Program's
1999 Executive Council Meeting
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Letter from the Executive Council Chair - Maryland Governor Parris Glendening
A Snapshot of the Chesapeake Bay: How is it Doing?
What's New Fact Sheets
Water Quality
Living Resources
Toxics Reduction
Air Quality
Forests
Land, Growth and Stewardship
Community Watershed Initiative
Citizens Advisory Committee
Businesses for the Bay
Local Government Advisory Committee
The 1999 Chesapeake Bay Program Partner Highlights:
Maryland
Virginia
Pennsylvania
District of Columbia
Chesapeake Bay Commission
Businesses for the Bay 1999 Excellence Award winners
The State of the Chesapeake Bay report
-------
STATE OF MARYLAND
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
PARRIS N. GLENDENING
GOVERNOR
ANNAPOLIS OFFICE
STATE HOUSE
1OO STATE CIRCLE
ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND 21401
December 8, 1999 '•"« 374-3901
ITOLL FREEI 1 -800-81 1-8336
WASHINGTON OFFICE
SUITE 311
444 NORTH CAPITOL STREET, N. W.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000!
I2O2I 624-1430
Dear Friends: TDD /4W/ 333.30ag
In 1987, the Chesapeake Bay Program partners accepted a great challenge. We entered into a compact
that committed the State of Maryland, the Commonwealths of Virginia and Pennsylvania, the District of
Columbia, the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the members of the Chesapeake Bay
Commission to one of the most all encompassing environmental restorations ever undertaken. With
comprehensive goals, dates and targets, the historic 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement set a new worldwide
standard for environmental action.
Now, it is time for the Bay Program partners to acknowledge our past successes, reaffirm leadership
and recommit to a healthy and productive Chesapeake Bay. In the year 2000, with the signing of a renewed
Chesapeake Bay Agreement, the Bay Program will move the cleanup of the Chesapeake into a new age with
new goals, new commitments and a new sense of purpose.
Last year, at the annual Executive Council meeting, I observed that the key to successfully restoring the
Bay and its tributaries is the commitment of people who live in the Bay watershed. As we meet this year to
craft language for the new 2000 Bay Agreement, I am proud to report that we have heard from citizens in every
corner of the watershed. We have been given a clear message from the people who call the Bay region home.
Be bold. Be decisive. Take action on the land, so that our waters run clean and clear. Make our streams and
rivers healthy contributors to a healthy Bay. They also told us not to look back but meet the challenges of the
future and manage the Chesapeake for the days of tomorrow.
Speaking for my Executive Council colleagues, I want to assure all who care about the Chesapeake Bay
that we have listened to your concerns, we have understood the meaning of your words and we have particular
empathy for the depth of your feelings about the future of this most important of all natural resources. So, we
ask you to join us in meeting the new challenges of the 21s1 century and to embrace the renewed spirit of the
new Bay Agreement by offering your advice and counsel. The draft Bay Agreement we will release needs your
approval. It needs your perspective. It needs the consensus of the people who will be challenged to meet its
goals and achieve its commitments.
The new Agreement's drafting process has been specifically designed so that the people who live and
work in the Bay watershed will have ample opportunity to tell us what they think. We need to hear from you,
so that next June the Bay Program will continue to be the world's model for environmental action, and the
people who live in the Bay watershed will continue to be regarded as the truest stewards of one of the world's
greatest natural resources.
Sincerely,
Parris N. Glendening
Governor
-------
Chesapeake Bay Program
A Snapshot of
Chesapeake Bay: How's it Doing?
i MJ •• A r j \ s (
2000
The Bay and its rivers are doing better than they were when the first
Chesapeake Bay Agreement was signed in 1983, but we still have a way to go before we reach our
goals for a restored Chesapeake. The "patient" has been stabilized and is showing signs of
improvement, but it's not ready to go home yet.
How do we know the Bay and rivers are getting better?
Nutrient Pollution Levels are Declining in Non-tidal Portions of the Rivers
These results measure the success of management programs being implemented throughout the watershed
1985-98
y V Deenertig
D No ilgnlfcant trand
Concentrations are declining in the Susquehanna,
Potomac, Patuxent, Rappahannock, Mattaponi (a tributary
to the York) and James rivers. The Pamunkey (a tributary
to the York) and the Appomattox (a tributary to the James)
show no trend.
Nitrogen
Concentrations are declining in the Susquehanna,
Patuxent, Rappahannock, Mattaponi (a tributary to the
York), James, and the Appomattox (a tributary to the
James) rivers. The Potomac and Pamunkey (a tributary to
the York) show no trend.
Results are shown for flow adjusted trend analyses of monitoring data using the earliest complete data set collected since 1985 through 1998.
Bay Grasses have Increased
since 1984
600-
<
114
100-
Potential Habitat (600,000 acrea)
Interim Goal (114,000 acres)
But in certain areas, such as
Tangier Sound, acreage has
declined dramatically.
787980818283848586878889909192939495969798
Striped bass stock declared restored in
January 1995.
Restoration Goal
1960
Fishing moratoria:
MD&DE: 1985-1990.
VA: 1989-1990
Bald Eagles are
on the Rebound
§700
s
1600-
§•500-
£400-
JJ300
=
J200
s
:ioo
No longer endangered
due to ban on DDT and
habitat improvements.
5DT Ban 1972
— Young
— Active Nesta
7778798081 8283848566878889 90 91 92939495 969798
80 85 90 95 98
Striped Bass are
Responding to
Management
Efforts
The Chesapeake Bay Program is the voluntary partnership among the U.S. EPA (representing the federal jgovernment), the jurisdictions of MD, VA, PA & DC, the
Chesapeake Bay Commission, and participating citizen advisory groups. For more information, call 1-800-662-CRIS or visit the Chesapeake Bay Program website at
www.chesapeakebay.net. 12/1/99
-------
Chesapeake Bay Facts
Chesapeake Bay Program
• Chesapeake Bay is the largest estuary in the United States,
with a 64,000 square mile watershed, or drainage basin,
covering parts of six states (DE, MD, NY, PA, VA, WV)
and the District of Columbia.
New York
•The Bay has 11,860 miles of tidal shoreline.
•The Bay is fairly shallow. A person six feet
tall could wade over 700,000 acres of the
Bay without being completely submerged.
•The Bay is one of the country's
most valuable natural resources. It
provides millions of pounds of
seafood, functions as a major hub
for shipping and commerce, supplies
a huge natural habitat for wildlife,
and offers a wide variety of
recreational opportunities for
residents and visitors.
I I Chesapeake Bay
Watershed
Chesapeake Bay Watershed
• More than 15 million people live in the Bay watershed and all of them live just a few minutes from
one of the more than 100,000 streams and rivers that drain into the Bay.
• Our daily activities and the choices we make have impacts on those streams, rivers and the Bay.
What can you do to help restore the Bay?
Prevent pollution from entering the Bay and
rivers by planting trees, especially near
streams and shorelines.
Conserve electricity and water and reduce
the amount of miles you drive.
Plant native vegetation that requires the use
of less fertilizer, pesticides and water.
Limit fertilizer use and apply at appropriate
times.
Use safer, nontoxic alternatives for cleaning
and for controlling pests and weeds.
Properly dispose of household hazardous
waste, antifreeze, oil and boat waste.
Prevent pollution by reducing, reusing and
recycling.
Get involved in local organizations that
monitor land management and participate in
efforts to manage growth.
For more ideas, call 1-800-662-CRIS.
Get involved with citizen monitoring efforts that track
progress in the Bay cleanup.
Bernie Fowler's Sneaker Index
Bernie wades into the Patuxent River every
" year to test improvements in water clarity.
Goal
44.5"
40"
41.5'
37"
35.5"
10"
||
16" 16"
11
28" 28"
ill
50'860's 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
The Chesapeake Bay Program is the voluntary partnership among the U.S. EPA (representing the federal government), the jurisdictions of MD, VA, PA & DC, the
Chesapeake Bay Commission, and participating citizen advisory groups. For more information, call 1-800-662-CRIS or visit the Chesapeake Bay Program website at
www.chesapeakebay.net.
-------
. s A p E A K E
20QQ
The Renewed Agreement
What's new with . . .
WATER QUALITY
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY REGION IN 1999
Extremes in Freshwater Flow Affect Bay
Water quality in 1999 was strongly influenced by the
weather and, as in most years, the weather was not "normal."
The most extreme weather lasted from the beginning of the
year through mid-August as a severe drought persisted across
most of the watershed. As a result, the cumulative freshwater
flow from Bay tributaries was below normal from January
through August and set new record lows in May and June.
The year would not end dry, however. Remnants of hurri-
canes Dennis and Floyd hit the Bay watershed in late August
and mid-September, respectively. In some areas, especially
close to the Bay, up to 15 inches of rain fell. In the wake of
Floyd, some rivers, such as the Choptank, neared record flows.
These rains were very helpful in relieving the drought condi-
tion. Cumulative flows to the Bay for September and October
actually exceeded historical averages during these months
when flows typically reach the annual minimum.
Freshwater Flow to the Bay
V FLOW INTO CHESAPEAKE BAY
NAt OAT*SUBJECT TO REVISION
Drought Affects Salinity Levels Baywide
The drought caused significant seasonal shifts in the salinity
of the Chesapeake Bay. Lower freshwater flow permitted saltwa-
ter from the ocean to move farther north into the Bay and its
tributaries. During June and July, the low-salinity region at the
north end of the Bay was 49% smaller than average for that time
of year. The mid-salinity region was 27% smaller, and the high-
salinity region near the mouth of the Bay was 38% larger. In
many rivers, such as the Rappahannock, salinity moved farther
up river than in any year since regular monitoring began in 1985.
Salinity is important because it defines habitat for many
plants and animals. Creatures that survive in low-salinity water,
such as yellow perch and largemouth bass and Bay grasses
such as wild celery and sago pondweed, had less habitat in the
summer of 1999. On the other hand, creatures that need high-
salinity water for survival, such as hard clams and blue crab
larvae and the Bay grass species widgeon grass and eel grass,
had more habitat area. The stinging sea
nettle, which requires high salinity, was
more abundant than usual in the early
summer. Oysters suffered this year
because of a greater incidence of the dis-
eases Dermo and MSX, which are
favored in high salinity years.
Low Oxygen Leads
to Fish Kills
Probably the most severe and obvious
effect of the drought was the prevalence
of summer fish kills due to low oxygen
conditions in creeks, often in combina-
tion with elevated water temperatures.
The low flow conditions reduced flush-
ing in the upper parts of many Bay tribu-
taries, allowing algae to proliferate in
these shallow, nutrient-enriched environ-
ments. Normal flows would have flushed
nutrients and algae farther downstream
where blooms may not have grown as
large or caused the same degree of oxy-
gen depletion. As these algal blooms
-------
decomposed, or consumed oxygen during the night, oxygen
concentrations dropped to lethal levels in several areas, such as
creeks draining to Baltimore Harbor, the Magothy River and the
Pocomoke River. Higher salinity levels added to the problem by
forcing many of the freshwater species, such as yellow perch,
up into creeks in search of suitable, low-salinity habitats. Unfor-
tunately, these small remaining low-salinity habitats were the
same ones experiencing the loss of oxygen and higher water
temperatures.
Low Flow May Help Bay Grasses
in Some Areas
Preliminary data from the 1999 underwater Bay grasses
survey indicate that Bay grass acreage in some areas expanded
and that these improvements may have been related to the low
freshwater flow this year. Low freshwater flow and precipitation
meant that lesser amounts of sediments and nutrients were
washed into the Bay from land-based and atmospheric sources
in 1999. Both of these pollutants reduce the amount of light
available for Bay grasses to grow. One of the areas that has
shown an improvement is Tangier Sound, which has experi-
enced marked declines in recent years.
Potomac River Improves
The give and take of biological communities living at the
boundary between freshwater and saltwater was evident in
the tidal Potomac River during the 1999 summer drought. As
record low river flows in May, June, July and August allowed
saltier water to move upriver, freshwater organisms were
contained in smaller areas of the river while traditional salt-
water species—such as blue crab, bluefish, speckled trout
and flounder— roamed farther upriver. Drought conditions
benefitted some species and hurt others.
Underwater Bay grass beds in parts of the Potomac
expanded their coverage and increased their diversity in
response to the abundant sunlight, low flows and good water
clarity in parts of the river. These same conditions also spur
the growth of large algal blooms. A brilliant bluegreen
(cyanobacteria) algal bloom formed below the District of
Columbia in July and August, and a red tide (dinoflagellate)
bloom developed in the middle of the river. Watermen have
reported heavy oyster mortality in the lower Potomac. The
prolonged drought could have intensified Dermo disease and
possibly caused an outbreak of MSX disease in this area.
Dermo and MSX are caused by oyster parasites that are not
harmful to humans. Offspring of the recovering American
shad population, which needs low salinity nursery grounds,
did poorly in the Potomac. In contrast, numbers of juvenile
striped bass were above their long-term average, possibly
because striped bass adults are now so abundant.
One of the major questions concerning the Potomac is
how have nutrient reductions in the past three decades
improved habitat in the tidal portion of this river'? A group of
scientists and managers believes they have—up to a point.
In a recent report, a team of state, federal and university
analysts evaluated long-term Potomac monitoring data and
found signs of recovery.
• Summer dissolved oxygen near the District of Columbia
no longer drops below five milligrams per liter, the mini-
mum concentration considered acceptable for aquatic life.
The exception to this is in slow-flowing, heavily enriched
tributaries, such as the Anacostia River.
• Ammonium, a form of nitrogen abundant in poorly treated
sewage, rarely reaches concentrations stressful to animals.
• Underwater Bay grasses are returning and continue to thrive
despite less-than-ideal water clarity in the tidal portion.
• The diversity of plankton and bottom-dwelling species is
increasing in the middle, or low-salinity, portion of the
tidal river.
• Algal blooms do not have the intensity, or the magnitude,
they once had in the 1970s and 1980s, chiefly because
concentrations of phosphorus have been reduced 24% to
95% along the length of the tidal river since 1965.
• Recently implemented Biological Nutrient Removal
(BNR) at the Blue Plains Sewage Treatment Plant is
expected to reduce nitrogen, the other overabundant nutri-
ent, and further improve water quality.
These signs of improvement are somewhat offset by the rec-
ognition that further efforts are needed to restore a vigorous
Potomac ecosystem. Those efforts must include reducing sedi-
ments suspended in the water, reducing toxics and restoring and
protecting healthy oyster, fish and wildlife populations. How-
ever, the Potomac is continuing on the path toward recovery.
For more information on water quality, go to
www.chesapeakebay.net/wquality.htm
on the Bay Program website.
Chrcipeake Bay Program
-------
CHESAPEAKE I
2000
The Renewed Agreement \
What's new with . . .
LIVING RESOURCES
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY REGION IN 1999
Since its inception in 1983, the Chesapeake Bay Program's
highest priority has been the restoration of the Bay's living
resources—its fmfish, shellfish, Bay grasses and other aquatic
life and wildlife. More than 3,000 species of plants and animals
inhabit the Chesapeake ecosystem. Many are doing well or are
recovering, while others require more attention and targeted
restoration efforts.
Annual Grass Survey Shows Decline
Underwater Bay grasses, also called submerged aquatic veg-
etation or SAV, are ecologically vital to the Bay's other living
resources. Bay grasses provide food and habitat for waterfowl
and many forms of aquatic life, including fish, crabs and inver-
tebrates. They also reduce erosion and wave action, absorb
nutrient pollution and trap sediments. Bay grasses respond to
water quality improvements that result from reduced sediment
and nutrient pollution. Because they are not harvested like many
of the Bay's other living resources, they are excellent indicators
of the Bay's overall health and water quality.
Bay grass survey results indicate that total acreage decreased
8% in 1998, following two consecutive years of increases. The
total 1998 acreage represents 56% of the Bay Program's interim
restoration goal of 114,000 acres in 2005. The latest survey also
showed that, for the sixth straight year, grasses declined in
Tangier Sound—one of the most productive areas for crabs in
the Bay. Scientists are looking at a variety of causes for the
decline, including increased suspended sediment, decreased
water clarity and excessive nutrients—all of which contribute to
conditions that block the light grasses need in order to grow.
Bay Grass Acreage
600
Potential Habitat (600,000 acres)
0)
ff 114
u
< 100-
o
8 60-
in
£ 40-
O
I 2°-
Interim Goal (114,000 acres)
i^-No SurveyaJ || |
787980818283848586878889909192939495969798
Wetlands Goal Endorsed
In 1999, the Bay Program developed a wetlands restoration
and protection goal for endorsement by the Chesapeake
Executive Council and inclusion in the proposed Chesapeake
2000 agreement. The goal recommits the Bay Program jurisdic-
tions of Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania and the District of
Columbia to achieving "no net loss" of wetlands. The goal also
commits the Bay Program to restore wetlands in the region and
to support local efforts to protect existing wetlands.
Key Fish Passase Projects Completed
In 1993, the Executive Council established a five-year goal
to reopen 731 miles and a ten-year goal to reopen 1,357 miles
of blocked Bay tributary waters to migratory fish, including
American and hickory shad, blueback herring, alewives and
eels. To date, almost 90 projects have been completed, including
the construction of 35 fish ladders and lifts, 45 dam removals
and breaches, and reconstructed culverts and dam notches.
To date, more than 1,100 miles of Bay tributary waters have
been reopened to migratory fish.
In 1999, the Bay Program completed two of its most impres-
sive fish passage projects: one at Bosher's Dam in Virginia and
the other at the York Haven Dam in Pennsylvania. The new fish-
way at Bosher's Dam opened 137 miles of the James River
from Richmond to Lynchburg, in addition to more than 200
miles of tributaries. The new fish ladder at York Haven Dam
was completed in late 1999 and will be operational by the
spring run in 2000. York Haven was the final mainstem block-
age to migratory fish on the Susquehanna, the Bay's largest
river.
Upcoming high-priority projects include a fishway at the
Abutment Dam in Petersburg, Virginia, which will open 121
miles of the Appomattox River, and the removal of the Embrey
Dam on the Rappahannock River in Fredericksburg, Virginia,
which will open 71 additional miles. This puts the Bay Program
on track to exceed the 2003 goal.
Aquatic Reef Restoration
£P Construction Continue
The massive oyster reefs that used to filter the Bay's water
and that once covered the bottom of the Bay so densely that
they posed navigational hazards are gone. Many of the three-
dimensional reefs that provided habitat for oysters and other
aquatic species have been reduced to flat surfaces. Since 1993,
however, the Bay Program has focused on creating and restoring
aquatic reefs throughout the Bay. These efforts appear to be
-------
paying off. During the 1998-99 season, oyster harvests through-
out the Bay improved: Virginia harvested 50,000 bushels—an
increase over last year's harvest—and Maryland harvested
300,000 bushels.
• In 1999, Maryland completed two reef projects, both in the
Severn River, which is known for long-term oyster survival.
One project restored the ten-acre habitat of an existing nat-
ural reef, and the other created 13 small shell piles over a
half-acre and flat shell planting over five acres.
OF NOTE:
>• More Shad: In an ongoing effort to rebuild populations
of American shad in the rivers of the Bay region, Maryland,
Virginia, Pennsylvania, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
and two tribal governments (the Mattaponi and Pamunkey)
are involved in hatchery and restocking efforts. In 1998 and
1999, more than 65 million American shad were released in
Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania rivers. Maryland also
cultured and stocked more than 30 million hickory shad
larvae in several tributaries.
>• New Grasses Report: The Submerged Aquatic
Vegetation Habitat Requirements and Restoration Targets:
A Second Technical Synthesis is available for viewing
and downloading from the Bay Program website at
www.chesapeakebay.net/temporary/savts2/. This document
contains the latest research on Bay grasses and includes a
comprehensive list of the species of Bay grasses in the
Chesapeake and supporting scientific literature.
• In 1999, Virginia built five reefs: two in Mobjack Bay,
one in the York River and two in the Lafayette River. The
Virginia reefs contained more groups of newly attached,
juvenile oysters (called spat sets) than those on the adja-
cent flat bottom. In the Piankatank River in Virginia,
breeding oysters, or broodstock, that watermen had har-
vested were relocated, resulting in an improved spat set
over approximately 5,000 acres and yielding 50,000 to
100,000 seed oysters. Recent ecological studies indicate
that crabs, finfish and clams also are benefitting from the
three-dimensional reef habitat.
However, even with the good news of higher spat sets, the
drought of 1999 took its toll on the oyster, producing high
salinities in Maryland and Virginia waters that increased oyster
mortality from MSX and Dermo.
Investment in Habitat Restoration Pays Off
Since 1993, the Bay Program has funded important habitat
restoration projects that have resulted in a total of 278 acres of
wetland creation and restoration, and approximately 11 miles of
stream and riparian forest buffer restoration. In 1998 and 1999,
the Bay Program funded proposals that are expected to result in
an additional 549 acres of wetland restoration, 18 miles of
stream restoration and more than 20 miles of riparian forest
buffers. Many of these projects were targeted to specific geo-
graphic areas to achieve maximum results for living resources.
>• Tulloch Ditching Leads to Massive Wetlands Loss: In 1993, the practice of draining wetlands by digging ditches and care-
fully removing the excavated material came under the scope of the Army Corps of Engineers wetlands regulations, under what is
now known as the Tulloch Rule. A federal court overturned the rule, so the practice is again unregulated. Among the Bay
Program jurisdictions, Virginia is most vulnerable to losing wetlands to Tulloch ditching, since it does not have a nontidal wet-
lands regulatory program. As of October 1999, almost 2,500 acres of Virginia wetlands had been drained by Tulloch ditching and
6,500 more acres were at risk.
>• Bay's Blue Crabs Fully Exploited: The Chesapeake Bay Stock Assessment Committee adopted the 1999 Chesapeake Bay
Blue Crab Advisory Report, which concluded that the Baywide stock of blue crabs is fully exploited and that the spawning stock
biomass is below the long-term average (1968-1998). According to the report, an increasingly large portion of the spawning
stock has been harvested in recent years (1993-1998), and there has been no evident trend in recruitment during this same
period. For a copy of the report go to www.noaa.chesapeakebay.net or call 1-800-YOUR Bay (ext. 676).
For more information on living resources, go to
wvwchesapeakebay.net/baybio.htm
on the Bay Program website.
-------
CHESAPEAKE
2000
The Renewed Agreement
What's new with . . .
TOXICS REDUCTION
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY REGION IN 1999
The Chesapeake Bay Program's toxics goal
is "... a Chesapeake Bay free of toxics by
reducing or eliminating the input of chemical
contaminants from all controllable sources to
levels that result in no toxic or bioaccumula-
tive impact on the living resources that inhabit
the Bay or on human health." The Bay Pro-
gram continues to take steps toward control-
ling and reducing inputs of chemical
contaminants to the system and toward better
defining toxic conditions in the Bay.
What's The Problem?
The nature, extent and severity of toxic
impacts vary widely throughout the Chesa-
peake system. A few areas called hotspots or
Regions of Concern have serious localized
problems, and some other regions, previously
thought to be free of toxics, have shown some
toxic effects. Overall, however, there is no evi-
dence of severe, system wide toxics problems.
Toxics Characterization Report
Released
In 1999, the Bay Program released Target-
ing Toxics: A Characterization Report—
A Tool for Directing Management and Moni-
toring Actions in the Chesapeake Bay's Tidal
Rivers. This toxics characterization is the
most comprehensive assessment to date of the
status of chemical contaminant effects on liv-
ing resources—its fish, shellfish and other
creatures—in the tidal rivers of the Bay. The
information in the report will help Bay Pro-
gram decision makers target specific tidal
rivers for management and monitoring.
Further updates to the characterization will
occur as data are collected. For a copy of the
report, go to www.chesapeakebay.net or call
1-800-YOURBAY.
Status of Chemcial Contaminant Effects in
Living Resources in the Bay's Tidal Rivers
Susquehanna,
Bush
Gunpowder
Middle
Back
Northeast
<;
Baltimore Harbor/Patapsco
Magothy
Anacostia*
/ Nanticoke
Potomac
Eastern Bay
' Wye
" Miles
^Choptank
. Wicomico
Rappahannock
Mattaponi
Pamunkey
Chickahominy
iig Annemessex
*>r^3$ QPocomoke
Tangier Sound
York i Mobjac£
'
James
LEGEND
Region of Concern -
area with probable
adverse effects
Area of Emphasis -
area with potential for
adverse effects
~] Area with Low Probability
for Adverse Effects
[I] Area with Insufficient or
Inconclusive Data
D Not characterized due to
historically low levels of
chemical contaminants
Elizabeth
-------
Top Findings:
• No new Regions of Concern. Three areas were designated in
1993 and still remain. They are the Elizabeth River in Vir-
ginia, the Baltimore Harbor/Patapsco River in Maryland, and
the Anacostia River in the District of Columbia. These are
areas where there are proven toxics effects in living
resources.
• 8 Areas with Low Probability for Adverse Effects. These are
areas where living resources are unlikely to be affected by
chemical contamination.
• JO Areas of Emphasis. These are areas where living
resources may be affected by chemical contamination.
• 20 Areas with Insufficient or Inconclusive Data. Data were
inconclusive or insufficient to characterize a region into any
of the above categories. These regions will be given high pri-
ority for future characterizations and will challenge
researchers and managers to determine their status.
The characterization effort was designed to identify areas
where chemical contaminant effects to the Bay's living
resources occur or have the potential to occur. Human health
impacts from contaminated air, soil or water were not
addressed. Because potential human health issues are important,
state agencies have already looked at human health issues in the
tidal rivers of the Bay. Where human health concerns already
have been identified, appropriate fish consumption advisories or
other warnings have been issued. The results of the report
should not alter the current recreational or commercial uses of
any of the rivers.
Loading and Release Inventory Released
Also released this year, the 1999 Chesapeake Bay Basinwide
Toxics Loading and Release Inventory (TLRI) reports the chem-
ical contaminant loadings to the Bay and its major tributaries.
This inventory represents the most comprehensive accounting of
loadings from point sources from urban runoff, atmospheric
deposition, shipping and boating, acid mine drainage and
upstream sources. The loadings inventory, coupled with the tox-
ics characterization, will enable managers, scientists and stake-
holders to target toxics reduction and prevention activities
toward specific sources and chemicals in impacted areas of the
Bay. Major findings from the TLRI include:
• Upstream point and nonpoint sources provide substantial
loads of metals to the Bay and tidal rivers.
• Urban runoff below the fall line is a substantial source of
select organic contaminants (PAHs) to the Bay and tidal
rivers.
OF NOTE:
>• Bay Program Meets IPM Goal: Integrated Pest Man-
agement, or IPM, is a pollution prevention technique that
can help the agriculture industry and other pesticide users
to reduce their reliance on potentially harmful chemicals.
According to a recent agronomic crop survey, the current
Bay Program goal that calls for 75% of agricultural land
within the basin to be under IPM by 2000 has been met.
The survey reported IPM was practiced on nearly 3.9 mil-
lion acres or 79% of the surveyed acreage. The goal also
calls for IPM on 75% of recreational and public lands,
50% of commercial land, and 25% of residential land.
Based on IPM requirements on recreational and public
lands, this goal also has been met. Bay Program partners
now are concentrating on meeting the IPM goal on resi-
dential and commercial lands.
Integrated Pest Management
Total Croplands Surveyed (MD, PA, VA)
-4.85 million acres
Year 2000 Goal: -3.64 million acres
Data collected prior to 1997
were estimated and are not
comparable to the 1997/96
survey data and were
removed from this Indicator.
88 89 90 81 92 93 94 95 96 97 98
>• Reevaluation and Revision Under Way: The Bay
Program is reevaluating and revising the 1994 Toxics
Strategy. The process, called the Toxics Reevaluation
and Revision, will lead to the drafting of a new basinwide
toxics strategy for the Chesapeake Executive Council's
endorsement in 2000. So far, input from more than 250
stakeholders from all levels of government; environmental
and public interest groups; research institutions; and
industries have been included in the Reevaluation and
Revision.
For more information on toxics reduction, go to
www.chesapeakebay.net/toxics1 .htm
on the Bay Program website.
-------
What's new with . . .
AIR QUALITY
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY REGION IN 1999
T T 7hen the Federal Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act became
VV laws in the early 1970s, air pollution and water pollution
were considered two separate problems. In recent years, research
has provided us with a better understanding of the link between
these environmental threats. There is strong evidence that clean-
ing up the air will also lead to cleaner water. Since 1993, the
Chesapeake Bay Program has evaluated the effectiveness of air
pollution controls as a part of the overall effort to protect the Bay
from its number one pollution problem: an overabundance of the
nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus. The following is an overview
of the latest scientific findings related to nitrogen emissions and
deposition in the Chesapeake Bay region.
New Info on Airshed Emerges
The Bay Program is regularly updating air-related data and
information to help managers better assess and target pollution
control measures. To assist in this effort in 1999, experts reeval-
uated the nitrogen oxide, or NOx, airshed for the Chesapeake
Bay region. The reevaluation concluded that the airshed is
418,000 square miles, or roughly 15% larger than previously
estimated. Gauging the size of the airshed is important for
Bay managers because air pollution has local and long-range
impacts. Depending on the source and chemical make-up,
air pollution can be carried by the wind for hundreds of miles
before depositing on the earth. Almost everything that burns
emits NOx. Some of the primary sources include industries,
electric utilities, and automobiles. These sources, and others,
contribute to the nitrogen-rich air pollution that affects the
Bay and its rivers.
Interest in Ammonia Emissions on the Rise
Ammonia is another form of nitrogen emitted into the air by
natural and man-made sources. The primary sources of ammonia
emissions include agricultural activities and urban influences.
More than 90% of the ammonia emissions in the Bay region are
generated by agricultural activities, including confined and
unconfined animal operations and fertilizers. Urban influences
include wastewater treatment facilities and fossil fuel combus-
tion from engines. Experts agree that the impact of ammonia
emissions in the Bay region are an important emerging issue that
will receive further study in 2000. Computer modeling experts
plan to have an estimated ammonia airshed for the Chesapeake
Bay region and the results from several ammonia research stud-
ies ready by the fall. Gauging the size of this airshed is impor-
tant for Bay managers because ammonia emissions—like NOx
emissions—also have local and long-range impacts.
How Much Nutrient Pollution
Comes From Air?
When scientists and other experts measure the amount of
atmospheric nitrogen that reaches the Bay, they evaluate two
aspects: deposition and loading. Deposition is the process by
which air pollutants deposit to the Earth's surface. Loading is
the amount of pollution that is delivered directly to the Bay and
tributaries. When nitrogen-rich air pollution lands directly on
the water, the deposition amount equals the loading amount.
But, when air pollution is deposited on land, the nitrogen can
be used up as it is carried by surface runoff or through ground-
water flow before it reaches the waters of the Bay. For example,
in a forested ecosystem, experts believe that roughly 90% of
the airborne nitrogen deposited is absorbed by the vegetation.
This means that for every ten pounds of nitrogen deposited,
one pound will become a loading to the Bay. The difference
between deposition and loading makes characterizing the con-
tribution of atmospheric nitrogen pollution a challenge. How-
ever, experts agree that the amount of nitrogen pollution from
the air is significant. In fact, about one quarter of the total
nitrogen delivered to the Bay comes from the air. Up-to-date
information on loading and deposition is key for Bay Program
managers because, as other nutrient source controls reach their
limit of technology, controlling air-deposited nitrogen will
become even more important to restore and
protect the Bay.
Sources of Nitrogen Loads to the Bay
Other Nonpoint Sources (55%
Fertilizer and
manure
Septic tanks
natural sources
Atmospheric (21%)
Point Source (24%)
Wastewater
Treatment Plants
Industry
atmospheric
from land
(15%)
atmospheric
to water (6%)
Sowee: Chesapeake Bay Program Phase IV Watershed Model, 1985 Reference Scenario.
For more information on air quaility, go to
www.chesapeakebay.net/air_pollution.htm
on the Bay Program website.
-------
S A P E A K E
2000
The Renewed Agreement \
What's new with . . .
FORESTS
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY REGION IN 1999
Forests: A Key to the Bay's Health
The health of streams and rivers and the resilience of the
Chesapeake Bay watershed is linked to trees. Forests perform
important environmental functions that we sometimes take for
granted. Forests protect our streams and soil; clean our air and
water; provide opportunities for outdoor recreation; supply
habitat and food important to the survival of many Bay species;
and supply raw materials for the fuel, lumber and paper that we
use every day. Scientific findings clearly show that, as living
filters, forests are the most beneficial land use for clean water.
Losses Offset Gains
Forests make up nearly 60% of the land in the Bay water-
shed or approximately 24 million acres. The U.S. Forest Service
estimates that more than 100 acres of forest are lost every day,
with the most rapid declines in areas closest to the Bay. Refor-
estation has generated some gains in the headwater regions of
the watershed, though other areas have seen more than 85% of
forest cover converted to agriculture or urban development.
A major cause of forest loss today is the way we develop
land. Forests are cleared to make room for new homes, shop-
ping malls, roads and other types of development. We now
develop land at a rate much faster than our population is grow-
ing, sprawling across the landscape and requiring more forests
and farms to be cleared. By 2020, new homes could consume
more than 600,000 acres of forests and farmland. Planning to
retain forests as we grow will be one of the big challenges of
the next millennium.
Forest Acreage Declining
"S 100
Land
abandoned
after Civil
War and
Depression
Land
cleared for
agriculture
and timber
1850 1900 1950 2000
Defining Impacts of Forest Fragmentation
When large tracts of forest are carved up into smaller and
more isolated patches, forest fragmentation is the result. Frag-
mentation is most serious when forests are converted to urban
development or agriculture because those types of land use
affect water quality and quantity, fish and wildlife populations,
and the biological health and diversity of the forest itself.
Fragmentation can disrupt animal travel corridors, increase
flooding, increase the invasion of non-native vegetation, expose
forest interiors and create conflicts between people and wildlife.
Experts have found that even small habitat losses occurring over
time have a combined effect and may prove as dramatic as one
large loss. The Chesapeake Bay Program highlighted forest
fragmentation as an important issue in 1999. The following are
highlights from some of the programs and projects recently
completed:
• In 1999, the Bay Program's Forestry Workgroup, the U.S.
Forest Service and the Society of American Foresters
conducted a professional roundtable series. Its primary
objective was to hear from scientists and experts in the
field about how forest fragmentation and land ownership
parcelization may be affecting our forests ecologically
and economically. The results of the series are available
by calling 1-800-YOUR BAY (ext. 706).
• The Bay Program Geographic Information System team
completed a spatial assessment of forest fragmentation in
the Chesapeake watershed. The analysis quantifies frag-
mentation in the Bay states on a watershed basis and
helps to define and characterize the extent and location of
fragmentation in the entire basin. For more information,
call 1-800-YOUR BAY (ext. 706).
• In November 1999, the Bay Program and the U.S. Forest
Service sponsored a regional conference designed to share
the latest science and information on the ecological, eco-
nomic, and policy and law impacts and issues related to
fragmentation. The conference, Balancing the Landscape:
Retaining Forests in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed,
helped initiate the development of a strategy to address
the issues. For more information, call 1-800-YOUR BAY
(ext. 706).
Buffer Miles Adding Up
As more people in the Bay region are discovering the impor-
tance of trees and forests, citizens have made significant strides
in focusing on forest issues in their efforts to protect and restore
the Bay system. Much of this effort was sparked by the 1996
-------
Restored Forest Buffer Miles
2000
1800-
1500-
1200
900
600
300
Year 2010 Goal:
2,010 miles
Bay Program goal
that called for the
restoration of 2,010
miles of streamside,
or riparian, forest
buffers by the year
2010. This initia-
tive, known as the
Chesapeake Bay
Riparian Forest
Buffer Initiative, is
in full swing. From
January through
September 1999,
nearly 203 miles of
forest buffers had
been planted. That
brought the cumulative total to 476 miles since 1996. To high-
light the effort, each jurisdiction increased awareness and out-
reach, expanded incentives to landowners and worked to
permanently protect riparian forests.
1996199719981999
OF NOTE:
>• New Report: The Bay Program released a new forest
buffer report in 1999: Riparian Forest Buffers Linking
Land and Water. This publication explains the crafting
of the initiative, including policy goals recommenda-
tions. It's available on the Bay Program website at
www.chesapeakebay.net or by calling 1-800-YOUR BAY.
>• The Bay Program partners distributed more than 8,000
copies of the Chesapeake Bay Forests Matter poster in
1999. For a free copy, call 1-800-YOUR BAY.
Partner Highlights from the
Forest Buffer Initiative:
MARYLAND
• Completed a pilot project to monitor forest buffer survival
and success
• Conducted field work for a water quality model being devel-
oped by the University of Maryland
• Conducted a study examining the effectiveness of incentive
and regulatory programs
• Completed outreach programs and marketing materials to
expand participation in the Conservation Reserve Enhance-
ment Program, a national effort that offers incentives to
protect and restore riparian and wetland areas
PENNSYLVANIA
• Co-sponsored two workshops for riparian forest restoration
and trained 110 people
• Provided $64,000 to the Stewardship Incentive Program for
cost-share of riparian forest buffer restoration
VIRGINIA
• Applied to the U.S. Forest Service Legacy Program to
secure conservation easements and purchases of unique
and valuable forest habitat
• Approved, through the Virginia legislature, $1.75 million for
the Land Conservation Foundation
Partnership Project Kicks Off
The U.S. Forest Service and the private, nonprofit organiza-
tion Ducks Unlimited teamed up in 1999 with forestry agencies
in Maryland and Virginia to focus on the restoration of riparian
areas and wetlands in several tributaries to the Potomac River.
The project, one of 12 chosen from a nationwide pool of 48,
will focus on Maryland's portion of the Monocacy and
Antietam River watersheds and on the north and south forks
of Virginia's Shenendoah River. The project will result in the
restoration of more than 150 acres of wetlands and more than
200 miles of riparian forest buffers.
To learn more about Chesapeake Bay forests, go to
www. chesapeakebay. net/forest, htm
on the Bay Program website.
-------
What's new with . . .
LAND, GROWTH AND STEWARDSHIP
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY REGION IN 1999
The Chesapeake Bay Program's Land, Growth and Steward-
ship effort works to identify Baywide land use and growth
issues and to forge alliances with other organizations working to
preserve the health of the Bay system, including its natural
landscapes. The Bay Program effort keys on three areas: sound
land management decisions, the impacts of existing growth, and
public and private actions to reduce the impact of growth on the
Bay system. In 1996, the Bay Program adopted the Priorities
for Action for Land, Growth and Stewardship in the Chesapeake
Bay Region as a way to address population growth and land
development. The goal is to encourage sustainable development
patterns that integrate economic health, resource protection and
community participation. The Priorities for Action represent the
first step in meeting this challenge in a manner that is sensitive
to local issues and autonomy and that emphasizes the desire to
help communities in the Bay region help themselves. In 1999,
the Bay Program continued to develop its crosscutting program
to promote sustainable development in the Bay region. The
following highlights touch on some of those efforts.
Workshops Help Local Communities
Grow Responsibly
As part of the effort to encourage livable communities, the
Bay Program continues to sponsor workshops for local officials
that highlight effective ways to reduce the impacts of growth.
One series of workshops—the Better Site Design and Watershed
Planning Workshops—focuses on teaching municipal officials
how to prepare small watershed plans and how to implement
innovative land development principles, such as green parking
lots, stream buffers, cluster development, narrow streets and
pollution prevention programs. The workshops also help local
officials identify ways to change existing codes and ordinances
to reduce impervious cover, conserve natural areas and reduce
storm water runoff. Participants get hands-on experience using
real-world site plans. For example, officials from Frederick
County, Maryland, participated in one of the first workshops.
They are working to implement innovative practices by review-
ing their local codes and ordinances to allow for better develop-
ment patterns. The Bay Program is expanding this program to
include a "train the trainers" program designed to instruct local
planners to train others to review local codes and ordinances. A
similar training program is under way in Pennsylvania through
the Growing Greener initiative. Growing Greener focuses on
how communities can conserve open space and natural
resources while accommodating some growth. For more infor-
mation on the Bay Program workshops or on Growing Greener,
call 1-800-YOUR-BAY, ext 847.
Bay Program Issues New Report
on Growth and Development
As part of its effort to inform and educate
the public and specific stakeholder groups on
the role they can play in improving the health
of the Bay and its rivers, the Bay Program
continued to develop a broad range of
Environmental Indicators throughout 1999. Environmental
Indicators use the most recent data and information to illustrate
the status and trends for a variety of issues from water quality
to human impacts on the Bay system. In June 1999, the Bay
Program issued a new publication featuring Environmental
Indicators and interpretive text related to population and growth
issues in the Bay region. For a free copy of Chesapeake Bay
Watershed: Its Land and People, go to the Bay Program website
at www.chesapeakebay.net and click on publications or call
1-800-YOUR BAY.
Stay Tuned
• A handbook for local communities illustrating techniques for
designing environmentally friendly residential, commercial
and industrial sites will be available through the Bay Pro-
gram in 2000. The techniques focus on reducing the impact
of development on existing natural features and comparing
conventional site design to environmentally friendly site
design.
• The updated Chesapeake Bay Public Access Guide will be
available in 2000. This popular map highlights specific
locations in the Bay region where the public can access
waters of the Bay and its tributaries from boat ramps, parks,
fishing piers, hiking trails and recreational areas.
• The Chesapeake Bay Area Public Access Technical Assis-
tance Report is being revised and reprinted. This report,
designed for local governments, provides technical guidance
on the acquisition and development of public access sites.
• A literature synthesis on the environmental and economic
effects and costs of septic systems is being conducted by the
Bay Program. The purpose of the study is to identify the
hidden costs of septic systems and the relationship between
growth patterns and septic systems.
• In addition to its other web-based activities, the Bay Program
sponsored the development of a web-based database that
offers references on alternative development practices. It
includes nutrient removal information, economic and cost
considerations, model ordinances or case studies, and other
social and environmental considerations. The site provides
summaries of each reference, plus information on how to
obtain copies. The database will be available in early 2000.
For more information on Land, Growth and Stewardship, go to
www.chesapeakebay.net/landscape.htm
on the Bay Program website.
-------
C M E S A P
20QO
The Renewed Agreement
What's new with the . . .
COMMUNITY WATERSHED INITIATIVE
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY REGION IN 1999
The Chesapeake Bay Program officially recognized the
importance of community watershed organizations to the
restoration of the Bay and its living resources in 1997 when the
Chesapeake Executive Council signed the Community Water-
shed Initiative. The Bay Program fleshed out the initiative in
1998 with adoption of the Community Watershed Initiative
Strategy.
New Community Watershed
Task Force Established
In 1999, the Bay Program further committed itself to partner-
ing with and supporting community-based efforts to protect and
restore the Bay system by forming the Community Watershed
Task Force. The role of the task force is to implement the strat-
egy. Currently, the task force includes representatives from eight
regional and local watershed groups, as well as federal, state
and local government representatives from throughout the Bay
watershed.
The task force identified several initial priorities, including:
• Assessing the needs of community groups and the needs
and interests of other Bay Program partners in working
with community groups;
• Packaging existing Bay Program tools and resources for
communities;
• Conducting outreach to communities about Bay Program
goals and how they translate to local rivers and streams,
as well as about the resources available to protect rivers
and streams; and
• Promoting opportunities for collaboration and coordina-
tion among the Bay Program's subcommittees and part-
ners as they work in communities.
Survey Names Top Concerns
In July, the Bay Program's Community Watershed Task
Force issued a survey to more than 290 organizations in the Bay
watershed. The purpose of the survey was to assess the needs
and interests of the growing number of community watershed
groups and to identify their top concerns. The survey attracted
84 responses or a 29% response rate. Overall, the survey
showed that these groups are active in restoration, pollution
prevention and planning activities. The top two issues identified
as concerns were protecting drinking water quality (81%) and
Top 5 Issues Identified by Organizations
Issue % of Orgs
1. Protecting drinking water quality 81 %
2. Conserving/restoring rivers and streams 74%
3. Preventing natural disasters (e.g., flood control) 65%
4. Protecting/restoring wildlife and habitat 63%
5. Maintaining/restoring commercial and/or 60%
recreational fisheries
conserving/restoring rivers and streams (74%). Respondents
also said that while they are very concerned about the quality of
their local rivers and streams, they are less concerned with the
overall health of the Bay (46%).
Funding is the type of assistance most sought after by these
organizations, according to the survey. However, the groups also
identified needs for:
• Technical assistance and guidance, especially with pollu-
tion prevention and restoration projects;
• Assistance with the production of outreach materials;
• Training for outreach and organizational development;
and
• Equipment and materials, especially plants, trees and
seeds for riparian buffers and stream bank restoration
projects.
Bay Prosram Responds with Clearinshouse
The survey results will help to shape the work of the task
force by identifying gaps and generating interest in the goals
and commitments of the Bay Program. As a result of the survey,
the Bay Program is creating a clearinghouse to facilitate part-
nerships and mentoring among watershed groups and among
Bay Program partners and watershed groups. The clearinghouse
will be designed to connect those local watershed groups with
specific needs and interest areas to those groups with expertise
and resources in those areas. This web-based clearinghouse will
be available in 2000. For more information, contact Amanda
Bassow, (410)267-5723.
-------
Small Watershed Grants Prosram Under Way Website Highlights Communities
The Chesapeake Bay Small Watershed Grants Program com-
pleted its first full year in 1999. The program provides small
grants to organizations working at the local level to protect and
improve watersheds. The purpose of the grants program, which
is funded through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, is
to demonstrate effective techniques and partnership building to
achieve Chesapeake Bay objectives at the small watershed
scale. In 1998, the program awarded $650,000 in grants to
37 community groups and local governments throughout the
Bay watershed. Projects ranged from creating a greenways plan
for the Tunkhannock Creek watershed in northeastern Pennsyl-
vania, to developing tools to educate landowners about soil
erosion in Annapolis, Maryland, to demonstrating the benefits
of a constructed wetland in a low income community in
Norfolk, Virginia. For more information on Small Watershed
Grants, call Karen Hester Abrams of the National Fish and
Wildlife Foundation, (202) 857-0166.
The new Bay Program website, www.chesapeakebay.net,
features information on the entire Bay watershed, as well as
the local watersheds that help to support the region. It also has
several resources that will assist community-based organiza-
tions. Those resources include:
• Bay Atlas: Allows users to customize maps of their
watershed using various data available through the Bay
Program, including land cover, submerged aquatic
vegetation, and some water quality data.
• My Watershed: Uses Bay Program data to generate
profiles of watersheds at a range of scales, from large to
small. The profiles include a map of the watershed and
graphs depicting population trends, land cover and nutri-
ent and sediment pollution information. The profiles also
help users find Bay Program-funded restoration projects
in their watershed; the local public access sites to the Bay,
rivers and streams; local businesses that are pollution
prevention partners in the Businesses for the Bay program;
and local watershed groups that are active in the area.
• Community Resources: An annotated listing of resources
available through the Bay Program and its partners, in-
cluding specific contact information.
For more information on the Community Watershed Initiative,
30 to www.chesapeakebay.net
on the Bay Program website.
Chetapeakc Bay Program
-------
S A P E A K E
20QO
What's new with the . . .
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY REGION IN 1999
The 25-member Citizens Advisory Committee, formally
established in 1985, provides advice and guidance on
Chesapeake Bay restoration and protection activities to the
policy-making body of the Chesapeake Bay Program—the
Chesapeake Executive Council. The committee's other respon-
sibilities include assisting Bay Program partners in implement-
ing the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement, its amendments and
the directives signed by the Executive Council. The committee
members also work with their constituencies to increase under-
standing and implementation of the agreement and the variety
of programs in place to restore and protect the Bay and its
rivers. The members come from a broad cross section of the
public and include environmentalists, farmers, fishermen,
representatives of business and industry, developers, academia,
scientists and representatives of local and state government.
OF NOTE:
>• Citizens Advisory Committee members participated on
the Bay Program's Nutrient Trading Negotiations Team;
the Living Resources Subcommittee; the Toxics Subcom-
mittee; the Budget Steering Committee; the Communica-
tions and Education Subcommittee; the Education
Workgroup; and the Nutrient Subcommittee.
X The committee rounded out its membership in 1999
with the addition of the following members: Gary Baise
of Virginia, a partner in the law firm of Baise, Miller &
Freer; Jim Elliott of the District of Columbia, an attorney
with Hunton and Williams; Kurt Erickson of Virginia, the
Executive Director of the Washington Regional Alcohol
Program and immediate past president of the Virginia
Conservation Network; Victor Funk, a retired chief of
Pennsylvania's Department of Environmental Protection;
Larry Herman, a regulatory policy specialist currently on
leave of absence from Virginia's Office of the Attorney
General on assignment with the Consumer Product Safety
Commission; Ted Jackson of Virginia, who supervises six
wastewater treatment plants in Loudon County; and John
(Neil) Wilkie of the District of Columbia, a retired vice
chairman of Morgan Guaranty Bank International.
Chesapeake 2000 is Top Priority
During the past year, the Citizens Advisory Committee
placed a high priority on the development of the renewed
Chesapeake Bay Agreement through active participation on the
renewal committees. The new agreement—Chesapeake 2000—
is scheduled to be put in place by the Executive Council in mid-
2000. The agreement will guide the Bay Program over the next
ten to 15 years. As a participant in the year-long process, the
committee conveyed the priorities that the public felt should be
included in the agreement. To underscore its point, the commit-
tee released its statement of priorities for the new agreement in
May. Those priorities, delivered to key decision makers
throughout the region, included:
• Achieving and maintaining the 40% nutrient cap agreed
to in the 7992 Amendments to the Chesapeake Bay
Agreement:
• Addressing in a meaningful manner growth management
and the challenges posed by increasing population trends
and transportation needs in the Bay watershed; and
• Effectively engaging the public in Bay restoration efforts.
In order to enhance its knowledge of the public's priorities
for the new agreement, the committee also participated in the
Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay's Renewal Project. As the
Renewal Project and the agreement drafting process continue
through 2000, the committee will make the development and
implementation of the Chesapeake 2000 agreement a high
priority.
Final Land Use Forum Held
In 1999, the Citizens Advisory Committee conducted the
third in its series of successful land use forums held throughout
the Bay region. The forums were designed to bring together
professionals from the development and building communities
to address issues, obstacles and problems that they face in
moving toward more Bay-friendly development practices. The
results of all three forums provide specific starting points for
the committee and the Bay Program partners as they begin to
work with local and state officials to remove obstacles to
Bay-friendly development practices.
For more information on the Citizens Advisory Committee, go to
www. chesa pea kebay. neVcomm ittee. htm
on the Bay Program website, a™,**, 0,,?^,
-------
The Renewed Agreement \
What's new with . . .
BUSINESS FOR THE BAY
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY REGION IN 1999
T)usinesses for the Bay is the Chesapeake Bay Program's
J-) voluntary pollution prevention program for businesses,
government facilities and other organizations within the Bay
watershed. Since the program began in 1996, more than 250
facilities have committed to preventing pollution by joining
Businesses for the Bay. In addition, 90 individuals from those
participating facilities have volunteered to serve as Business-to-
Business Mentors, providing their pollution prevention expertise
to others in need of technical assistance. Businesses for the Bay
also has a group of Partners, which are organizations that help
to promote Businesses for the Bay and pollution prevention to
their members.
Making Great Progress
Each year, Businesses for the Bay participants report on the
progress they make in preventing pollution. Participants report-
ing this year said that they reduced or recycled almost 877 mil-
lion pounds of wastes in 1998. These wastes ranged from
specific chemicals to air emissions to solid waste. Several facili-
ties also volunteered to report their cost savings. As a result of
their efforts, more than $3.9 million was saved. These results
are up significantly from 1997, when 222 million pounds were
reduced or recycled and $ 1.4 million was saved. In addition,
many facilities reported that they trained employees on pollu-
tion prevention techniques. In 1998, more than 4,600 employees
in the Bay watershed were trained.
Businesses Report Chemical Releases
Another indicator of the progress businesses are making in
reducing their releases of chemicals to the Bay watershed is
contained in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
OF NOTE:
BUSINESSES
"
>• Articles about Businesses for
the Bay and its participants were
featured in national publications
such as Water Environment & Technology and Coastlines
and regionally in newspapers such as The Washington
Post, Baltimore Business Journal, Richmond Times-
Dispatch, and the Bay Journal in 1999. The program also
was featured at national and regional conferences.
national Toxic Release Inventory or TRI. According to the most
recent inventory, facilities that report to the TRI cut their chemi-
cal releases by 67% between 1988 and 1997. This remains
steady compared to the 1996 information. However, these
reductions still exceed the Bay Program's goal for industry,
which is a 65% reduction by 2000.
Toxics Release Inventory
300
Year 2000
Measurement of Progress
1988
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
And the Winners Are . . .
Congratulations to the recipients of the Businesses for the
Bay 1999 Excellence Awards and to the 1999 Mentor of the
Year:
• Small Business, Outstanding Achievement—Parker's Exxon,
District of Columbia
• Medium Business, Outstanding Achievement—Uniroyal
Goodrich, Scottsville, Virginia
• Medium Business, Significant Achievement—DAP, Inc.,
Baltimore, Maryland
• Large Business, Outstanding Achievement —Siemens
Automotive Corporation, Newport News, Virginia
• Large Business, Significant Achievement—Procter &
Gamble Cosmetics, Hunt Valley, Maryland
• Mentor of the Year—Denise Jeffries, City of Newport News,
Newport News, Virginia
-------
First-Ever Annual Meeting
Businesses for the Bay members gathered on December 3 in
Annapolis, Maryland, for the first- ever Businesses for the Bay
Annual Meeting.
• Participants networked and shared pollution prevention ideas.
• Participants received tips on implementing Environmental
Management Systems, getting employees and their CEOs to
understand the importance pollution prevention, and identify-
ing the hidden cost savings of preventing pollution.
• Businesses for the Bay 1999 Excellence Awards winners and
the 1999 Mentor of the Year were honored.
Providing Technical Assistance
One way Businesses for the Bay helps facilities learn how to
prevent pollution is through technical assistance workshops. In
1999, Businesses for the Bay partnered with several organiza-
tions, including the Maryland Rural Development Corporation
and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, to teach
printers, fleet maintenance personnel, educators, and others how
to implement various pollution prevention activities. Businesses
for the Bay also relies on its Mentors to provide free, technical
assistance by sharing their experiences in preventing pollution.
For more information on Businessess for the Bay, go to
www.chesapeakebay. net/b4bay. htm
on the Bay Program website.
-------
What's new with the . . .
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY REGION IN 1999
There are more than 1,650 local governments in the Bay
region, including cities, counties, towns, townships and bor-
oughs. Local governments play a vital role in the protection and
restoration of the Chesapeake Bay system because they have
statutory authority to decide how the land in their jurisdiction
will be used and, ultimately, the way that the thousands of
streams and rivers that drain into the Bay will be protected. The
Bay Program recognized from the start the important role local
governments have in the regional clean-up effort. In 1988, the
top policy-making body of the Bay Program, the six-member
Chesapeake Executive Council, established the Local Govern-
ment Advisory Committee. The committee is the collective
voice of locally elected officials throughout the region. Since
1996, the committee has been charged with overseeing the
implementation of the Local Government Participation Action
Plan. The Action Plan identifies three theme areas in which
local governments have a substantial role in protecting and
restoring the Chesapeake Bay: land use management and stew-
ardship; stream corridor protection and restoration; and infra-
structure improvements. In 1999, the committee continued to
implement the Action Plan. The following highlights touch on
some of those efforts.
13 Bay Partner Communities Recognized
In 1999, the Bay Program recognized 13 communities for
their efforts to protect and restore the Bay as pan of the Chesa-
peake Bay Partner Communities program. The communities
include an existing Bay Partner Community that will upgrade its
status from silver to gold. This year's nominees bring the total
number of Bay Partner Communities to 52. Initiated in 1996,
the Chesapeake Bay Partner Communities program recognizes
communities that implement and sustain a broad range of activi-
ties that protect both local resources and the Bay. For more
information on the program, call the International City/County
Management Association, (202) 962-3589.
Team Conducts Two Environmental Reviews
The committee's Community Environmental Review Pro-
gram was completed in two communities in 1999: Warrenton,
Virginia, and Hampstead, Maryland. The review held in Warren-
ton focused on low impact development techniques and infill
development. The Hampstead review focused on innovative site
planning for a proposed 400 acre industrial site and revitaliza-
tion of its downtown. An ongoing program, each review brings
a team of technical experts together with community officials to
help address local concerns with a focus on protecting the Bay
system. Only communities that have applied to be Chesapeake
Bay Partner Communities are eligible for participation in the
Community Environmental Review Program. This requirement
encourages participation in the program. For more information,
call the International City/County Management Association,
(202) 962-3589.
Workgroup Organizes
Metropolitan areas in the Chesapeake watershed have orga-
nized a workgroup to provide more input into the Bay Program
decision making process. The workgroup is focusing its efforts
on urban watershed management and the potential fiscal effects
of Bay Program policies on metropolitan areas. For more infor-
mation on the program, call the Metropolitan Washington Coun-
cil of Governments, (202) 962-3200.
Local Governments Receive Funding
for Small Watershed Projects
The Chesapeake Bay Small Watershed Grants Program com-
pleted its first year in 1999 by awarding $650,000 in grants to
37 organizations and local governments. The program, which
provides grants to organizations or local governments working
OF NOTE:
]^- LGAC continued to communicate with all local
governments in the watershed through its newsletter
Bay Currents.
>• William Rumsey, Jr. of the District of Columbia, was
elected as the committee's new chair. State vice-chairs are
Gloria Fisher, Virginia; George O'Donnell, Maryland;
B. Kenneth Greider, Pennsylvania; and Cheryl Amisial,
the District of Columbia.
>• LGAC was one of the sponsors of the Summit Toward
a Sustainable Chesapeake, a two-day conference designed
to challenge local governments to develop sustainable
initiatives in the Bay watershed. The conference attracted
more than 300 participants.
-------
to protect and improve watersheds, is funded through the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Its purpose is to
demonstrate effective techniques and partnership building that
will help achieve Chesapeake Bay restoration objectives at the
small watershed scale. Local government-based projects
included a trout nursery raceway on an Amish farm in
Lancaster, Pennsylvania; a shoreline erosion education
project for landowners in Prince Frederick, Maryland; and
the development of a nature center for schools in Fauquier
County, Virginia. For more information on Small Watershed
Grants, call Karen Hester Abrams of the National Fish and
Wildlife Foundation, (202) 857-0166.
ICMA to Coordinate Committee
The International City/County Management Association
(ICMA) was selected to receive a grant to provide services to
local governments in the Chesapeake Bay region. The associ-
ation's responsibilities include staffing the committee, im-
plementing the Bay Partner Communities program, conducting
Community Environmental Reviews, providing technical
assistance to local governments and improving communication
between the Bay Program and the local governments in the
watershed.
CHESAPEAKE
BAY PARTNER COMMUNITY
1999
Chesapeake Bay Partner
Communities
MARYLAND
Anne Arundel County, Gold
Chesapeake City, Gold
City of Gaithersburg, Bronze
Takoma Park, Gold
Town of Princess Anne, Silver
PENNSYLVANIA
Adams County, Silver
Annville Township, Bronze
Lewisburg Borough, Bronze
VIRGINIA
City of Alexandria, Gold
City of Norfolk, Silver
Fauquier County, Bronze
Gloucester County, Bronze
Isle of Wight County, Bronze
For more information on the Local Government Advisory Committee,
so to www.chesapeakebay.net/committee.htm
on the Bay Prosram website.
-------
MARYLAND
1999 BAY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
The annual Executive Council meeting is an excellent time to review and highlight the
accomplishments of the state of Maryland as it works, under the leadership of Governor Parris N.
Glendening, to meet the goals and commitments of the Chesapeake Bay Program partnership. As a
partner in the Chesapeake Bay'Program since the signing of the historic 1983 Chesapeake Bay
Agreement, Maryland has worked hard in many areas including nutrient and toxic reduction, habitat
restoration, growth management, education, land preservation and public outreach and participation.
The hard work of the citizens of Maryland is paying off. The Bay and its tributaries are generally
cleaner and healthier than they were just 16 years ago when the first Bay agreement was signed.
Today, we would like to take a few minutes to give you an overview of how we have been working to
insure a cleaner, healthier more resilient Chesapeake Bay system.
OVERVIEW
In most areas our Bay restoration effort evidenced continued progress. However, 1999
was a year that put additional stress on the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland. A severe drought, the
worst in decades, afflicted the region. While this brought some short-term benefits to the Bay,
especially in terms of less nutrient and sediment pollution due to reduced runoff, there were also
negative consequences: Less fresh water flowing into the Bay raised salinities in tidal tributaries,
which stressed living resources who call these water bodies home; low oxygen conditions related
to the drought caused several fish kills in tidal creeks; trees, grasses and other vegetation were
adversely affected by the lack of rainfall; and the drought inflicted considerable economic hardship
on Maryland's farmers (more than $70 million in damages).
In areas of resource protection, outreach, education and citizen participation, Maryland
continued to set a strong pace. The second year of the state's Rural Legacy Program put additional
acres of the most ecologically valuable land under increased protection; the more than 350 members of
the Tributary Teams continued to demonstrate their value in developing new ideas and implementing
current plans; and more than 210 miles of riparian forest buffer have been established, putting the state
well ahead of its timetable to achieve 600 miles of new buffer by 2010. Another important milestone
in 1999 included national recognition for Maryland's unique Bay Game.
MARYLAND PROGRAM SPECIFICS
«t» Smart Growth and Neighborhood Conservation - Maryland continued implementing its
first-in-the-nation "Smart Growth" program to control sprawl and change the patterns of
development which have destroyed habitat, degraded water quality, and adversely affected
the state's communities through the use of:
Page 1 of 4
-------
Rural Legacy -- Maryland redirects existing State funds into a focused and
dedicated land preservation program specifically designed to limit the adverse
impacts of sprawl on our agricultural lands and natural resources. The program
creates "Greenbelts" - green spaces that generally define where a community or
developed area ends and where the countryside begins. The program reallocates
State funds to purchase conservation easements for large contiguous tracts of
agricultural, forest and natural areas subject to development pressure, and fee
interests in open space where public access and use is needed. Over the next five
years, the program will commit approximately $163 million to preserve nearly
90,000 acres of farms, forests and open spaces.
Priority Funding Areas — State investment in local jurisdictions is focused to
"smart growth"areas. State funds for roads and highways, business development
financing and economic development, water and sewer improvements, and most
housing programs are targeted to areas that meet select density and growth
criteria. The Priority Funding Area program discourages new development in
open spaces and aims to prevent problems associated with sprawl such as water
pollution from stormwater and construction runoff, additional air pollution from
increased commuting miles, and loss of wildlife habitat. Priority Funding Areas
include all municipalities, all areas inside the Baltimore and Washington beltways,
and designated revitalization areas, enterprise zones and empowerment zones.
"Brownfields" Redevelopment -- This program spurs redevelopment of
properties that are contaminated, or even perceived to be contaminated, while
ensuring that the environment and public health will continue to be protected.
Since the program began, the Maryland Department of the Environment has
received 49 applications for the voluntary cleanup program, covering more than
1,100 acres.
»?• Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) Program - One of Maryland's tactics for
implementing the Chesapeake Bay Agreement's nutrient reduction strategy for point source
discharges is though cost-share funding of biological nutrient removal of nitrogen and chemical
phosphorus removal at all wastewater treatment plants that have a design flow equal to or greater
than 500,000 gallons per day. Of Maryland's 65 treatment plants, 61 have either installed or have
signed cost-share agreements for implementation of BNR. This represents a 94 percent voluntary
participation rate. This year, $ 12.2 million has been authorized to fund 19 projects, bringing total
spending for BNR to $418 million.
«> Watershed Pollution Limits — Maryland continues work to establish pollution limits for
Priority State watersheds, a commitment matched by few states in the country. These
limits, called Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), effectively build upon the 40 percent
nutrient reduction commitments made in 1987 by establishing numeric commitments for
other pollutants. During the past three years, Maryland assessed the status of water
quality throughout the state, and identified those waters that are currently not meeting
designated uses. The state will establish a TMDL for the substances causing the
impairment of the waterways and the source of the substance (both point and nonpoint).
Priority water bodies include the Chesapeake Bay Tributary Strategy watersheds, the
Maryland Coastal Bays watershed, the Baltimore Harbor watershed, and water bodies
impaired by toxic chemicals.
Page 2 of 4
-------
Tributary Teams -- Maryland's innovative Tributary Teams continued to play an
increasingly important role in environmental management, more thoroughly involving
people and local governments in cleanup activities, testifying before special commissions,
and helping achieve the 40 percent nutrient reductions we have been working towards
since 1987. Their third annual meeting brought together team members from across the
state to meet with the Governor and other state officials to help chart the course for the
coming year. In June, in cooperation with the Sunpapers, the Chesapeake Bay Trust, US
EPA, and USDA a special booklet, "Fragile, Handle with Care," was inserted into the
Baltimore Sun. This booklet provided Marylanders with a comprehensive guide to both
cleaning up the Bay and protecting the land and water in each citizen's own back yard. In
September, a Tributary Team led Task Force completed recommendations to address
problems from septic systems and promote the use of advanced technologies.
Maryland Bay and Mountain Games - Created for children 3 years and up, Maryland's
Bay and Mountain Games help parents avoid the eternal question, "Are we there yet?"
The Maryland Bay and Mountain Games are an interactive educational activity designed
for children, played during car/bus trips between the Chesapeake Bay Bridge and the
Ocean City coast, and to Western Maryland. The games were designed to help young
people identify Bay-related objects, features and items (e.g., osprey nests, wetlands, farm
fields, watermen's boats) as they travel to Ocean City. The Maryland Bay Game was
designated as one of the Top 100 Innovations in American Government by Harvard
University and won the Water Environment Federation's prestigious Public Education
Award.
Bay Grasses in Classes - This educational program teaches students in 70 Maryland
schools about Bay grasses and their importance as habitat. Through a partnership
between the Department of Natural Resources, the Chesapeake Bay Trust, and the
Chesapeake Bay Foundation, students study Bay grasses, obtain various Bay grass seeds,
grow them in the classroom and then assist DNR biologists in planting them.
Chesapeake Lands - In order to protect Maryland's natural resources, Maryland acquired
all of the land formerly owned by Chesapeake Forest Products, over 58,000 acres on the
state's Eastern Shore. In partnership with The Conservation Fund and the Richard King
Mellon Foundation, the state will pay $16.5 million for the property, which is the largest
land acquisition in State history. The settlement will enable Maryland to protect some of
the State's most environmentally sensitive land, including thousands of acres of wetlands
and wildlife habitats.
Chesapeake Bay Bridge Repainting - As part of the continual upgrading of the 4.5 mile
Bay Bridge, Maryland launched a $70 million project to repaint the structure. Even
though this is almost double the original $45 million construction cost, the money is well
spent. Special procedures have been put in place to prevent lead paint chips, dust and
spray from polluting the waters of the Bay. These materials are being collected and
disposed of in a safe and environmental manner, instead of being dropped into the Bay.
Page 3 of 4
-------
*> Chesapeake Bay Education Initiative - As part of Maryland's Chesapeake Bay
Education Initiative, two school teachers traveled to Turkey as active participants in the
fourth international conference on Environmental Management of Enclosed Coastal Seas.
Ann Williams (Northern Middle School, Calvert County) presented a paper, and
Patricia Chambers (Stephen Decatur Middle School, Worcester County) contributed a
poster. Both showed how they were using authentic coastal research projects developed
during summer internships with the University of Maryland Center for Environmental
Science to enrich their school curricula. They made many networking contacts among the
very interested delegates from 50 countries, and Ms. Chambers received first prize for best
poster at the conference.
•> Green School Awards - A new initiative in Maryland recognizing schools for achievement
in environmental stewardship. Honored schools were chosen for projects that included:
natural restoration on school grounds, wetland restoration in the community, outdoor trail
development or responsible school transportation initiatives. No special curriculum was
needed to meet the criteria and the program was designed to support Maryland's education
goals. All public and non-public schools were eligible. Thirty four schools were selected as
Governor's Green Schools from more than 60 applications.
*> Invasive Species Controlled - To help protect public safety and preserve native living
resources in Chesapeake Bay tributaries, the Maryland Department of Natural Resources
led an intensive effort to remove dense populations of water chestnut from parts of the
Sassafras River and Bird Creek. (Water chestnut, native to Asia, is an aquatic plant that
endangers water resources and the safety of those who enjoy recreating in and around the
water.) In consultation with national experts, other state agencies, interest groups, federal
agencies, counties, and Maryland's Tributary Teams, the state attacked the potentially
dangerous plant with mechanical removal and a massive volunteer effort to manually
remove plants.
<» Worked with Farmers - Maryland Department of Agriculture provided $4.6 million to
assist farmers in installing over 900 projects to improve water quality. This funding will
prevent an additional 35,000 tons of soil from reaching Maryland waterways annually and
manage an additional 1,700 tons of animal waste daily. In addition, Maryland supported
local soil conservation districts, providing additional technical staff to install more than
7,000 best management practices on farms and develop over 1,200 Soil Conservation and
Water Quality plans encompassing 99,000 acres. The state also established the Poultry
Litter Transportation Pilot Project to assist farmers in redistributing excess poultry litter.
These were funded with matching funds from poultry companies, and provides up to $20
per ton to move poultry litter to areas that need additional fertilizers. Finally, MDA
developed the Nutrient Management Plan Cost Share Program to provide 50% of the cost
of developing certain nutrient management plans, up to $3 per acre.
As we head into the new millennium, Maryland's place in the natural world is a vital one. The
state embraces the largest and most productive estuary in North America, the Chesapeake Bay,
and much work and effort has been dedicated to its restoration. Every Marylander should
continue to give unyielding support to the cleanliness of our state's waters, the vitality of its
living resources, the purity of Maryland's air and the protection for future generations of a quality
of life unmatched anywhere in the United States.
Page 4 of 4
-------
THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA'S
1999 BAY PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS
With Governor Gilmore's commitment to improve water quality, unprecedented funding for that purpose, continuing
efforts to develop tributary strategies, the initiation of a major oyster restoration program, and other activities, 1999
proved a banner year for Virginia as a partner in the overall Chesapeake Bay Program effort.\ Here is a partial listing
of Virginia's accomplishments in 1999.
The Virginia Oyster Heritage Program: The Virginia Dept. Of Environmental Quality's Coastal Management
Program and the Virginia Marine Resources Commission are partnering with state and federal agencies, non-profits
and business to launch a large-scale oyster restoration effort. Beginning in the spring of 2000, phase one of the
Virginia Oyster Heritage Program will include the construction of eight, one-acre 3 dimensional broodstock sanctuary
reefs in the Rappahannock River. Each reef will be surrounded by 25 acres of restored shell bottom for enhanced
harvest to provide a sustainable fishery for Virginia watermen who will also be contracted to clean and prepare each
26 acre site. The reefs will be monitored to determine their success in increasing oysters, water clarity, and
biodiversity; educational materials will be prepared and volunteers will be trained for restocking efforts. The
Virginia Oyster Reef Heritage Foundation has been established as a nonprofit organization to raise private funds to
match private challenge grants and public agency grants.
Water Quality Improvement Fund and Legislative Actions: Commitment to achieving Chesapeake Bay and
tributary nutrient reduction goals remains strong in Virginia. A key incentive aiding implementation of point and
nonpoint source control actions continues to be the Water Quality Improvement Fund (WQIF), created by the 1997
Water Quality Improvement Act (WQIA). Cost-share provided by the WQIF has supported ongoing progress made
under the Shenandoah-Potomac Tributary Strategy, and the Commonwealth is poised to make significant funding
available to the lower tributaries (Rappahannock, York, James and small coastal basins) in the current grant cycle.
In 1999, Governor Gilmore and the General Assembly approved a $39.06 million deposit into the WQIF. Of that,
$9.83 million is for nonpoint source projects and $24 million is for point source projects during fiscal year 2000. The
balance of these new funds either is designated for specific Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and
Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) activities in support of nutrient reduction actions and tributary
strategy implementation ($1.68 million), or is interest credited to the WQIF plus non-specific appropriations (total
of $3.55 million). That amount will be allocated by the Secretary of Natural Resources between point and nonpoint
source programs after receipt of grant applications. The Appropriations Act also specified that the additional point
source program funds were to be used for nutrient removal facilities in the James, Rappahannock, York and small
coastal basins. Ongoing point source projects in the Shenandoah-Potomac basin will continue to be funded with grant
monies provided by the 1997 and 1998 Appropriation Acts.
Page 1 of 4
-------
THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA'S 1999 BAY PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS _
The following items represent recent accomplishments made under the WQIF:
^Thirty-two special projects totaling $3.325 million were made available by DCR with WQIA funds. The
Shenandoah-Potomac river basin was granted $1.85 million of the funds for 17 projects, and the state's lower bay
tributary basins received $975,000 for nine projects. The projects, which address NFS pollution, are being managed
through soil and water conservation districts, resource conservation and development councils, state colleges and
universities, local governments and agribusiness partners.
July 1999, WQIA funding of about $9.45 million was added to the Virginia Agricultural Best Management
Practices (BMPs) Cost-Share Program's bay area efforts. Another $1 .5 million was earmarked for rivers not draining
into the bay. This additional funding was prompted by the success of the program, which is administered by DCR
through the state's soil and water conservation districts. 1999 saw more farmers put more acres into BMPs using
state cost-share funds than ever before. Reductions included more than 2.6 million pounds of nitrogen, 543,146
pounds of phosphorus and 470,205 tons of soil. More than 1,200 farmers participated and installed more than 1,300
practices covering 90,000 acres.
1999, for the first time, DCR helped farmers in the Shenandoah-Potomac river basin by sharing the cost of
nutrient management plans written by certified consultants. Nutrient management planning and the implementation
of nutrient management BMPs have been identified as key factors in meeting nutrient reduction goals of the basin's
tributary strategies.
^Progress continues on point source nutrient reduction projects under 15 signed WQIF grant agreements in the
Shenandoah-Potomac river basin. These active projects account for approximately $57.84 million in 50 percent cost-
share for the design and installation of nutrient reduction systems. To date, nearly $12.3 million has been provided
in reimbursement payments to these grantees for work accomplished. Once operational, these systems will remove
about 6.7 million pounds of nitrogen and 91,000 pounds of phosphorus per year.
grant agreements were signed with Dale Service Corp. for projects involving privately owned sewage
treatment plants serving residential areas in the Shenandoah-Potomac river basin. These projects will use about $4.1
million of the $6 million appropriated by the General Assembly for this type of project. The balance, $1 .9 million,
is the subject of current grant negotiations with Sheaffer International Ltd. Clean Water for a proposed project in the
Shenandoah Valley. It will serve two towns and two poultry producers.
town of Purcellville signed a $1 .6 million grant agreement to include nutrient reduction in a new 1 .0 MOD
wastewater plant to replace their old facility. DEQ continues to seek participation in the WQIF cost-share program
by all significant (larger than 0.5 MGD) municipal wastewater facilities in the Shenandoah-Potomac basin. Not all
facilities eligible under the WQIF have applied for a grant, and some owners were not targeted in the tributary
strategy for nutrient reduction during the initial stages of implementation. While smaller in size compared with those
of many earlier grant projects, these plants can play an important role in achieving the 40 percent reduction goal.
^Negotiations continue with the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority to purchase additional nutrient
reduction at the Blue Plains facility through a WQIF grant. The 1998 General Assembly authorized use of up to $3.35
million for this purpose. Because several of the large plant retrofits underway in Virginia will not be on-line by 2000,
one interim measure is to take advantage of the cost-effective opportunity presented by this major Washington, D.C.,
facility. Blue Plains has the potential to reduce greater amounts of nutrients by operating at higher removal
efficiencies. Through a contractual agreement between Virginia and Washington, D.C., there is a much greater
chance of meeting the 40 percent goal for the Potomac through enhanced removals at Blue Plains.
Page 2 of 4
-------
THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA'S 1999 BAY PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS _
Development of Strategies for Virginia's Lower Bay Tributaries: Staff from state natural resources agencies
worked this past year with local governments, SWCDs and other interests to develop nutrient reduction goals for
Virginia's lower bay tributaries. These are also the first tributary strategies in the bay watershed to include sediment,
as well as nutrient, reduction goals. Strategies for the four tributary regions are either complete or nearly so.
Development of the strategies relied heavily on CBP monitoring and modeling data.
+Nonpoint sources contribute 80 percent of the controllable nutrient load in the York's watershed. Point sources
account for the rest. The York team called for reductions of 2.3 million Ibs of nitrogen, 60,000 Ibs of phosphorus and
9,000 tons of sediment by the year 2010, using 1996 as the base. Costs for implementing strategies needed to achieve
these goals are estimated at $45 million over 10 years.
*The Eastern Shore's strategy goal focuses mainly on restoring SAV acreage to historical levels. Shore region
interests agreed to work towards year 2003 targets, which, if implemented, would result in additional NFS reductions
of 120,700 Ibs of nitrogen, 14,000 Ibs of phosphorus and 3,000 tons of sediment, using 1985 as the base year. (These
numbers are beyond 1997 estimated reductions.) Costs for implementing the 2003 target reductions are estimated
at $2.8 million.
bay water quality model projects needed load reductions of 33 percent for nitrogen, 29 percent for phosphorus
and 20 percent for sediment to meet the Rappahannock basin's strategy goals. Those three goals, set for 2010, are
meant to reduce by 50 percent the river's annual volume of anoxic water and to increase by 50 percent the density
of SAV. Planning level cost estimates over the next 1 1 years for implementing practices to achieve such reductions
run about $8.79 million for point sources and $39.4 million for nonpoint sources. Both figures assume state cost-
sharing (50 percent for point sources and 75 percent for NPS). A re-evaluation of this strategy will be undertaken
in 2002.
^Regarding the James, while numerous water quality and living resources issues were identified during eight
meetings, the technical review committee has yet to reach consensus on nutrient and sediment goals. A document
further exploring establishment of James River goals will soon be available, and the document will undergo a public
review and comment period beginning this month and running through the first of the year
The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act: Those implementing Virginia's Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act continue
to work with Tidewater Virginia localities, soil and water conservation districts (SWCDs) and planning district
commissions (PDCs) to protect the water quality of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. This is done by managing
impacts from the use and development of land. The goal of the act is to achieve no net increase in nonpoint source
pollution as development in Tidewater occurs. Eighty-four units of local government, with land draining to the
Chesapeake Bay, are subject to the provisions of the act. During 1999, the following was accomplished:
^Fifty-four localities had various program review and approvals undertaken by the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance
Board. All 84 local governments now have ordinances incorporating into local law the act's requirements. Of these,
66 have had comprehensive plans, which are reviewed by the board, that provide protection to environmentally
sensitive areas. The remaining 18 have either an active review underway or a deadline established for such plan
review.
Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department (CBLAD) began evaluating local government implementation
of water quality performance standards through the investigation of complaints. More than 1 50 complaints have been
reviewed.
Page 3 of 4
-------
THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA'S 1999 BAY PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS
fiscal years 1999 and 2000, CBLAD provided 45 grants totaling $943,224 to local governments and PDCs within
Virginia's lower tributary basins, and grants amounting to $206,428 were made to those within the Shenandoah-
Potomac Tributary basins. The grants are for land use and water quality planning projects.
+CBLAD in 1999 commented on approximately 125 federal, state, local site plans and environmental impact reviews
(EIRs), assuring compliance with the act.
FY 1999, CBLAD provided $450,500 in grants to 1 1 Tidewater Virginia SWCDs. This resulted in bringing
another 30,377 acres of farmland under conservation plans and added 59 miles of buffer areas to Virginia's
waterways.
Virginia's Riparian Buffer Initiative: In 1996 the Executive Council adopted a goal of 2,010 additional miles of
riparian forest buffer Baywide by 2010 with the Virginia portion being 610 miles. Undqr the Virginia Riparian
Buffer Initiative we have restored more than 140 miles of forest buffer in the bay's watershed and 162 miles
statewide. Governor Gilmore signed an executive order in August 1999 which outlines state agency commitments
to this initiative, sets up a Riparian Working Group chaired by the State Forester, and describes efforts to meet the
goals of the bay adoption agreement.
Citizen Monitoring Agreement: The 1998 Letters of Agreement signed by OCR, DEQ and the Virginia Save Our
Streams Program were a great success. The items in the agreement were accomplished and, as a result, water quality
data collected by citizens will be used in the 2000 305(b) Water Quality Report. Based on the success of the two 1998
agreements, the same partners on October 29, 1999, signed an agreement to continue building Virginia's citizen
monitoring program.
Adopt-a-Stream Program: This Gilmore Administration supported water quality initiative came out of the 1998
General Assembly. 1999 marks the first active year of the program, which has seen 99 groups sign up. They have
adopted 284 miles of streams statewide. Sixty seven of the groups adopted 202 miles that are in the bay watershed
Fish Passage
Recent completion of a vertical slot fishway at Boshers Dam in Richmond reopened approximately 337 miles of
historical spawning habitat for migratory fishes in the James River and its tributaries from the Richmond fall line
to Lynchburg. This fish passage has reopened the most miles of historic spawning habitat of any single facility
anywhere in the United States.
Shad Restoration
Since 1992, the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries has conducted an American shad restoration effort in
cooperation with other state and federal natural resource agencies, the Mattaponi and Pamunkey tribal governments,
and the private sector. This effort has focused on reestablishment of American shad in the upper James River and
is being conducted in conjunction with fish passage initiatives. Initial results indicate that the stocking program is
beginning to recruit adult shad to the James River ecosystem.
Dameron Marsh Natural Area Preserve: The 316-acre Dameron Marsh was recently purchased by the state with
funding assistance from the Nature Conservancy, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Army Corps of Engineers,
the Northern Neck Audubon Foundation and the 1992 Virginia Parks and Natural Areas general obligation bond. The
property is managed by OCR. About 90 acres of the preserve had been farmed; that land was reforested using native
species. The plantings increased habitat and bring Virginia closer to its goal of planting 610 miles of forested buffers
along streams in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
Page 4 of 4
-------
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
1999 BAY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
Our concerns about the state of the Chesapeake Bay more than 10 years ago led us to a unique
agreement to solve pollution problems on a watershed basis. Pennsylvania recognized that the
activities in our own neighborhoods were having an environmental impact on the bay. The
Commonwealth understands the importance of being a good upstream neighbor. Over the past two
years we've made great strides in identifying our environmental priorities for the Commonwealth
for the next century, including our work on the protection and restoration of watersheds. The
following are highlights:
21st Century Environment Commission: Gov. Tom Ridge created the 21st Century Environment
Commission in 1997 to establish Pennsylvania's environmental priorities for the next century. The
commission also developed criteria by which to measure progress toward those goals, involving the
public throughout the process. Among the more than 240 recommendations and priorities mentioned
in its 1998 final report, the commission's 40 members identified land use as the single most
important environmental issue for the 21st Century.
Over the past year, we have begun to reinvent Pennsylvania's environmental future. In 1999, Gov.
Tom Ridge signed an executive order that set up more than 50 forums throughout the
Commonwealth to share land-use success stories and concerns. The Pennsylvania Center for Local
Government Services is compiling recommendations from those forums and will issue a report in
January, along with a catalogue of best land use practices.
Growing Greener Budget Initiative: To address the critical environmental issues of the 21st
century, Gov. Tom Ridge in 1999 proposed the "Growing Greener" budget initiative to provide $500
million dollars over the next five years to priority environmental programs. Growing Greener will
help Pennsylvania clean up abandoned mines and restore watersheds, protect open space and provide
opportunities for recreation, eliminate the maintenance backlog in our State Parks and provide new
and upgraded water and sewer systems. The proposal shifts funding priorities from the state to
communities, county conservation districts, watershed groups and authorities across the
Commonwealth.
Pollution Prevention: 1999 marked the four-year anniversary of the Department of Environmental
Protection (DEP) Office of Pollution Prevention and Compliance Assistance. The office is the
cornerstone of DEP's coordinated and user-friendly approach to environmentalPage 1 of 5
Page 1 of 5
-------
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA'S 1999 BAY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
protection. The goal for the future is to further enhance pollution prevention and energy efficiency
thinking in all that DEP does. It's also the second year for the Governor's Green Government
Council, created to assist all state agencies in adopting environmentally sustainable practices.
Hundreds of projects are underway.
Our best examples that a healthy environment, a dynamic economy and the well being of our
communities are directly linked are the winners of our Governor's Award for Environmental
Excellence. Over the last three years, award winners have reduced electricity use by more than 21
million kilowatt-hours; solid waste by 27 million tons; air pollution by 24 million tons; and
wastewater by more than 1.6 billion gallons. At the same time, they saved more than $142 million
in annual operating costs.
\'
Environmental Protection Compliance Tracking System: For more than a year, DEP has been
working on new performance measurements that focus on compliance rates rather than enforcement
activities, on outcomes, impacts and results rather than traditional counts, such as the number of
permits issued, number of inspections performed, number of enforcement actions taken or the total
fines and penalties collected. This approach provides compliance data not only in traditional
program specific formats, but also in a new facility-wide format. DEP is the first environmental
protection agency in the country that is able to show air, water, waste and other program activities
in a single integrated compliance view. Compliance data is available to the public on the DEP
website at www.dep.state.pa.us (choose Compliance Reporting).
Nutrient Management: One of Pennsylvania's major initiatives to help control runoff into the
Chesapeake Bay is the Nutrient Management Act. The act requires farms that meet the definition
of Concentrated Animal Operation (CAO) to develop and implement a nutrient management plan.
Five to 10 percent of Pennsylvania farms fall into this category, with more than half of these in
Southcentral Pennsylvania.
Since the program went into effect in October 1997, more than 700 regulated farmers are developing
nutrient management plans that must be implemented within three years of their final approval by
a conservation district or the State Conservation Commission. Financial assistance to develop plans
is available. The Agriculture Linked Investment Program offers $25 million in low interest loans
of up to $75,000, and efforts are underway to establish a grant program for financially distressed
operations. A new training and certification program for nutrient management specialists was
established in 1996, and 279 specialists have received certification. More than 125 farmers have
received individual certification to develop nutrient management plans for their own operations.
In 1999, DEP finalized environmental standards to protect ground and surface water from the
impacts of large animal feeding operations. Pennsylvania is the first state to comprehensively
address the water-quality impacts of the design, construction and operation of large-scale animal2
feeding facilities; manure storage structures; and the application of manure from these operations
to farm fields.
Page 2 of 5
-------
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA'S 1999 BAY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
The most stringent requirements are reserved for concentrated animal feeding operations of 1,000
or more animal equivalent units that are of most concern to the public. Farmers with smaller
operations are covered by the same environmental performance standards, but have simplified, less
expensive paperwork.
Watershed Protection and Restoration: DEP has been working with a network of volunteers to
help them meet their own goals in collecting data on Pennsylvania's thousands of miles of streams.
Citizen monitors collect water quality data on at least 3,000 sampling stations in watersheds
throughout the state. They also participate in the annual springtime Water Quality Snapshot
collecting information about physical, chemical and biological indicators of water quality. In 1999,
more than 200 groups participated in the event. DEP also is preparing a technical handbook for
community-based monitoring, publishes a quarterly newsletter and holds numerous training
workshops for volunteers to give them the latest information about monitoring and data collection
techniques.
In 1999, DEP gave more than $1.1 million to 61 groups under the department's Watershed
Restoration and Assistance Program. These grants were established in 1998 to assist locally managed
watershed restoration and protection projects that focus on nonpoint source pollution. Watershed
associations and other nonprofit groups, local governments and county conservation districts are
eligible.
Also in 1999, the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) awarded $1 million
in Rivers Conservation grants. Twelve of these grants help communities develop river conservation
plans. The plans outline local strategies that municipalities, residents and river support groups can
use to effectively implement river conservation initiatives such as streambank stabilization and
Stream ReLeaf riparian forest buffers; acid mine remediation; water-quality monitoring; public
accessibility for recreational opportunities; and citizen participation. Seven river conservation
implementation grants also were approved. The grants help accomplish the projects outlined in
approved rivers conservation plans.
Protecting Stream Banks: To improve water quality by reducing soil erosion and nutrient
deposition caused by livestock, the DEP Stream Bank Fencing Program manages livestock access
to streams by erecting fences and crossings or ramps. More than 54 miles of streams has been
fenced controlling 7,800 cattle on 123 farms in 32 counties, while simultaneously improving and
protecting about 400 acres of valuable riparian habitat. Between 1989 and 1996, Pennsylvania
funded a stream bank fencing program in cooperation with the state Game Commission. More than
145 miles of streams were fenced. By 1999, more than 70 miles of streamside buffers were restored
under Pennsylvania Stream ReLeaf. Stream ReLeaf was begun in 1997 to coordinate and promote
stream buffer efforts statewide, as well as private initiatives.
Community Conservation Partnership: Launched in 1995, the Ridge administration's Community
Conservation Partnership initiative provides funding and technical assistance to help communities
Page 3 of 5
-------
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA'S 1999 BAY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
and non-profit organizations conserve natural and cultural resources, provide outdoor recreation,
enhance tourism and foster community and economic development. Highlights of the program
include grants for community recreation, rivers conservation, rails-trails, open space protection and
recreational trails. In 1999, more than $21 million was awarded for projects that protected precious
open space and critical natural habitat, built trails and greenways, established parks and playgrounds
and conserved river resources.
Fish Passage and Shad Restoration: Fish passage and shad restoration have been the focal points
of Pennsylvania's commitments under the living resources goals. All four major hydroelectric dams
on the Susquehanna River between Conowingo, Md., and Middletown, Pa., have installed fish
ladders at a cost of $59 million; 435 miles of the Susquehanna River are reopened to natural runs of
shad and herring for the first time in almost 100 years.
Pennsylvania also has re-opened spawning habitat on tributaries that are blocked by small to mid-
sized water supply dams. Many of these dams once supplied water for mills, industrial needs, small
water systems and recreation and are now in disrepair or have been abandoned. DEP and the Fish
and Boat Commission are working to either breach or remove non-beneficial dams — more than 200
dams have been identified for possible removal in the Susquehanna basin. Since 1995, 18 low-head
dams have been removed on tributaries to the Susquehanna River and one fish ladder has been
constructed, providing access to more than 75 miles of tributary streams.
Forest Protection and Beautification: Pennsylvania launched an aggressive program to clean up
illegal pdumpsites on state forest and park lands in 1999. The five-year, $7.5 million effort hopes
to eliminate the thousands of tons of appliances, tires, furniture, building materials, household
hazardous waste, car parts and other garbage that is illegally dumped on these remote state lands.
Some of the waste is undoubtedly leaching into the groundwater and affecting local water quality.
Environmental Education: Gov. Tom Ridge began a new chapter in Pennsylvania's efforts to
promote environmental education by launching the Pennsylvania Center for Environmental
Education. The center is a partnership of 11 state agencies set up to identify unmet environmental
education needs and develop programs to meet those needs.
Pennsylvania also provides an Environmental Education Grant Program. The program is funded
through 5 percent of the fines and penalties collected by DEP. In 1999, 34 grants totaling $302,064
were distributed to promote environmental stewardship and awareness across the Commonwealth.
More than $2 million has been provided for the expansion and support of environmental education
over the past five years.
Land Recycling: Pennsylvania's Land Recycling Program marked its fourth anniversary in 1999
by celebrating the clean up of its 500th site. In the four years since its inception, the program has
grown to be a national leader in turning old sites into new opportunities for economic growth and
Page 4 of 5
-------
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA'S 1999 BAY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
environmental progress. More than 15,000 people now work on old industrial sites in the
Commonwealth.
Air Quality: Gov. Tom Ridge has been leading an effort since 1995 to get states from the Midwest
and South to reduce the nitrogen oxides into the Commonwealth and Northeast. In 1997, he was
joined by seven other Northeastern states in petitioning EPA to reduce transported emissions.
Although the issue is currently under litigation, Pennsylvania will continue its efforts to get all states
to do their fair share.
As part of the state's fair share plan, in May 1999, Pennsylvania implemented an air pollution
control program that reduces nitrogen oxide emissions from power plants by 55 to 65 percent. In
1997, Pennsylvania implemented an annual enhanced vehicle emissions inspection program in the
Philadelphia and Pittsburgh metropolitan areas. In the program's first six months, emissions were
reduced by the equivalent of removing 600,000 vehicles from the road. Through Stakeholder
Working Groups, Pennsylvania is currently exploring reducing more air emissions from the
Southcentral region and the Lehigh Valley.
Page 5 of 5
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA'S
1999 BAY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
The annual Executive Council meeting is an excellent time to review and highlight the
accomplishments of the District of Columbia as it strives to meet the goals and commitments of the
Chesapeake Bay Program partnership. As a partner in the Chesapeake Bay Program since the signing
of the historic 1983 Chesapeake Bay Agreement, the District of Columbia has worked hard in may
areas including sustainable development, nutrient and toxic reduction, habitat restoration, and
education. The hard work of the citizens of the District is paying off. The Potomac and Anacostia
Rivers are cleaner and healthier than they were just 15 years ago. Progress has been steady in other
areas as well. Today, we would like to take a few minutes to give you an overview of what we've
been working on the behalf of a cleaner, healthier more resilient Chesapeake system.
We have made significant progress in the following areas:
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
A strong diversified economy, and a clean, healthy environment are the goals of an extensive
community reinvestment and economic revitalization.
• Brownfields Program
This is a strategic plan developed to remediate contaminated sites that will be redeveloped.
• First Time Home Buyers Tax Credit
This tax incentive provides up to $5,000 for individuals purchasing their first home in the
District.
• Home Purchase Assistance Program
This program offers loans to low and moderate income families seeking to purchase a
home in the District.
• Rehabilitation and Reoccupation of Abandon Properties
The District is using financial incentives to promote the rehabilitation and reoccupation of
abandoned properties.
• Public Transportation
The District has always been in full support of public transportation, and has invested in an
extensive bus and subway system.
Page 1 of 3
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA'S 1999 BAY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
• Education curriculum are planned to prevent additional increases in nonpoint source
pollution nutrients to the rivers.
• Educators, students and community groups are the targeted audiences for pollution
prevention/environmental education efforts.
40 % NUTRIENT REDUCTION GOAL
• The District is confidant that it will reach the 40% Chesapeake Bay Program nutrient
reduction goal.
• This will be accomplished using innovative technology at Blue Plains wastewater treatment
plant.
• Further reductions will be achieved by targeting controllable sources of nonpoint source
pollution.
HABITAT RESTORATION
• The District has partnered with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) to restore 40
acres of tidal wetland in Kingman Lake, on the Anacostia River.
• The District has partnered with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) to restore 32
acres of tidal fringe wetland on the banks of the tidal portion of the Anacostia River.
• The District is using a comprehensive approach to Anacostia River restoration by restoring
stream habitat and stream side forests upstream in non tidal tributaries such as Fort Chaplin,
Fort Dupont, Hickey Run and Watts Branch.
ANACOSTIA RESTORATION
Mayor Anthony Williams has made restoration of the Anacostia River a top priority of his
administration. The goal is to make the river fishable and swimable without health concerns.
• Restoration efforts include restoring tidal wetlands, stream side forests and naturalizing
streams that have been hydrologically engineered, and daylighting streams that were
contained in pipes.
• Innovative technology is being used to filter storm water before it enters the river.
• The District is increasing public access to the Anacostia river through the restoration and
conservation of Kingman Island.
• Restoration of the Watts Branch, a tributary to the Anacostia is a model for watershed
planning that combines community participation and partnerships with habitat restorations,
Page 2 of 3
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA'S 1999 BAY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
pollution prevention education, and modifications of District services that work to the benefit
of the watershed.
• The District is imparting ideals of environmental stewardship through education and outreach
efforts such as the annual Anacostia Park Environmental Fair, Project Wet and Project Wild.
As we head into 2000 we are on the edge of change. As water quality increases and living resources
rebound, citizens will place a renewed importance on the Bay and its tributaries as a site for
recreation, a source of serenity, and a place of beauty. The work that has gone into restoring the Bay
and its tributaries up to this point has created strong working partnerships, identified the myriad
actions we must take to reach our goals, and laid the groundwork for us to reach the increasingly
tough goals that we will set for ourselves for the next twenty years.
Page 3 of 3
-------
CHESAPEAKE BAY COMMISSION
1999 BAY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
The Chesapeake Bay Commission is a legislative body created to advise the members of the General
Assemblies of Maryland, Virginia and Pennsylvania on matters of Bay-wide concern. Since 1980,
the tri-state commission has provided advice, support and leadership in environmental policy to the
region's lawmakers. Issues considered by its members are as wide-ranging and complex as the Bay
itself, delving into matters of air, land, water, living resources, and the integrated management of all
of them.
As a member of the Chesapeake Executive Council, the Commission brings to the Chesapeake Bay
Program an inter-jurisdictional perspective on policy issues that balances the more specific interests
of the jurisdiction's executive agencies. Its broad-based nature makes it an excellent forum for
generating discussions and building consensus on regional policy issues. The Commission
periodically sponsors legislation through its members which supports the policy matters acted upon
by the Bay Program.
Twenty-one members from three states define the Commission's identity and its workload. Fifteen
are legislators, five each from Maryland, Virginia and Pennsylvania, who are responsible for
identifying the environmental needs in the watershed, hearing the wishes of their constituents, and
determining actions that make better stewards of us all. Completing their ranks are the governors
of each state, represented by their cabinet members who are directly responsible for managing their
states' natural resources, as well as three citizen representatives who bring with them a unique
perspective and expertise.
In the 19 years since its inception, the Chesapeake Bay Commission has made remarkable strides
in learning the complex workings of an enormous estuary, determining federal and state actions that
are needed to sustain its living resources, and persuading their colleagues in the General Assemblies
and Executive Branch to take actions.
Laws heralded nationwide for their environmental foresight are products of the Commission's work
— the phosphate detergent bans, commercial and recreational fishing licenses, nutrient management
planning, land-use legislation, ballast water management, and bans on the use of tributyltin, to name
a few.
Page 1 of 4
-------
CHESAPEAKE BAY COMMISSION 1999 BAY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
The Commission also serves at the national level, acting as a unified voice to advise Congress on
national legislation and budget initiatives that will benefit the Bay region, and the nation as a whole.
On numerous occasions, the Chesapeake Bay Commission has coordinated the input of Maryland,
Virginia, Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia in order to secure passage of federal legislation
integral to the Bay restoration effort.
THE DRAFTING OF CHESAPEAKE 2000
In 1999, the Commission concentrated its efforts on the drafting of Chesapeake 2000. Serving as
Chair of the Drafting Team for the Chesapeake Bay Program, the Commission worked along with
its Bay Program partners to identify initiatives that needed to be carried forward from the past,
current programs that must be continued and future projects to pursue. The interests of the states,
the District of Columbia, the EPA and other federal partners and the broad range of stakeholders
involved were all considered as we coordinated the multi-jurisdictional drafting process.
The Commission served both as writer and policy analyst, always attempting to identify initiatives
that would lead us further along in our efforts to promote the Bay's protection and long-term
restoration.
The restoration of water quality, the protection of living resources and the improved management
of growth have been central to the Commission's focus. The members have strongly promoted the
protection of submerged aquatic vegetation, the reduction of sediment, the encouragement of
community watershed initiatives, the management of blue crabs, while all the while working to
reduce nutrient pollution.
The members have been retrospective in their consideration of a new Bay Agreement. The
Commission has analyzed progress in implementing the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement in order
to identify those actions needed beyond the year 2000. It has examined what has been
accomplished and determined that more must be done. When gaps have been identified, the
Commission has sought for solutions for inclusion in the draft Agreement.
Over the coming months, the Commission, along with its partners in the Chesapeake Bay Program,
will seek public comment on Chesapeake 2000. It will be critical to hear from both its supporters
and its opponents so that a document can be crafted that reflects the interests of the people.
It is only with the support of our 15 million "neighbors" within the Chesapeake Bay basin that we
can guarantee a better Bay. The health of our local waters, like the quality and character of our
neighborhoods, depends on our continued stewardship.
Page 2 of 4
-------
CHESAPEAKE BAY COMMISSION 1999 BAY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
1999 COMMISSION MEMBERSHIP
Chairman
Hon. Arthur D. Hershey
PA House of Representatives
Vice-Chairmen
Hon. Jerrauld C. Jones
Virginia House of Delegates
Hon. Brian E. Frosh
Maryland State Senate <
Hon. Robert S. Bloxom
Virginia House of Delegates
Hon. Bill Boiling
Senate of Virginia
Hon. Russ Fairchild
Pennsylvania House of Representatives
Hon. Bernie Fowler
Maryland Citizen Representative
Hon. Joseph V. Gartlan, Jr.
Senate of Virginia
Hon. John R. Griffin
Secretary, Maryland Department of Natural Resources
Hon. Irvine B. Hill
Virginia Citizen Representative
Hon. Charles A. McClenahan
Maryland House of Delegates
Hon. W. Tayloe Murphy, Jr.
Virginia House of Delegates
Hon. James M. Seif
Secretary, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
-------
CHESAPEAKE BAY COMMISSION 1999 BAY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
Hon. J. Lowell Stoltzfus
Senate of Maryland
Hon. Richard A. Tilghman
Senate of Pennsylvania
Hon. Michael H. Weir
Maryland House of Delegates
Hon. Noah W. Wenger
Senate of Pennsylvania
Hon. George B. Wolff .v
Pennsylvania Citizen Representative
Hon. John F. Wood, Jr.
Maryland House of Delegates
Hon. John Paul Woodley, Jr.
Secretary, Virginia Natural Resources
Hon. Peter J. Zug
Pennsylvania House of Representatives
-------
BUSINESSES
FORTHERAY
JL/l JL.J- Chesapeake Bay Program
THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM
RECOGNIZES AND CONGRATULATES
THE BUSINESSES FOR THE B>4 YAWARD WINNERS
1999 EXCELLENCE AWARDS
Parker's Exxon, Washington, D.C.
Recipient of the Outstanding Achievement Award for Small Business
Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Manufacturing, Scottsville, Virginia
Recipient of the Outstanding Achievement Award for Medium Business
DAP, Inc., Baltimore, Maryland
Recipient of the Significant Achievement Award for Medium Business
Siemens Automotive Corporation, Newport News, Virginia
Recipient of the Outstanding Achievement Award for Large Business
Procter & Gamble Cosmetics, Hunt Valley, Maryland
Recipient of the Significant Achievement Award for Large Business
**********
1999 MENTOR OF THE YEAR
Denise Jeffries
Commercial Recycling Coordinator, City of Newport News, Virginia
**********
SPECIAL RECOGNITION
Fauquier County Resource Management, Fauquier County, Virginia
City of Newport News, Virginia
-------
BUSINESSES
FORTHE'
Chesapeake Bay Program
Winner Profiles
Businesses for the Bay Excellence Awards
The Chesapeake Executive Council's Businesses for the Bay Excellence Awards recognize
Businesses for the Bay participants for their outstanding and significant work in implementing
pollution prevention activities at their facilities. Award applications for the Small, Medium and Large
Business categories were reviewed by a group of judges based on the following criteria: pollution
prevention activities; environmental and social significance; technical value and transferability to
other sectors or facilities; degree of commitment to pollution prevention;
and originality and innovation.
Parker's Exxon
Washington, D.C.
Recipient of the Outstanding Achievement Award for Small Business
Parker's Exxon, a 17-employee automotive service station located in the District of Columbia has shown
continual improvement toward reducing its releases and protecting the Chesapeake Bay. Since it won
the 1998 Businesses for the Bay Excellence Award for Small Business, Parker's Exxon has implemented
a variety of new pollution prevention activities. The station worked with Exxon Corporation, USA to install
a special area designated solely for recycling that has helped to delineate exact methods for the proper
storage and handling of pollutants and recyclable wastes. In addition, the installation of a covered
storage shelter for used batteries has helped Parker's Exxon to eliminate the possibility of contaminating
stormwater runoff. To further prevent contaminated runoff from entering the Potomac River and
eventually the Bay, Parker's Exxon recycles the oily water it collects from cleaning its automotive service
bays. To ensure that its pollution prevention programs are effective, Parker's Exxon trains its employees
about the practices and requests that they sign a "contract" stating that they recognize their responsibility
to prevent pollution. Parker's Exxon has been a member of Businesses for the Bay since 1997. For more
information, contact Lynn Cook at (202) 337-3144.
-------
Winner Profiles
Businesses for the Bay Excellence Awards
Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Manufacturing
Scottsville, Virginia
Recipient of the Outstanding Achievement Award for Medium Business
Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Manufacturing employs 225 people at its plant in Scottsville, Virginia, where they
manufacture treated tire cord fabric for Michelin North America's tire plants. Part of their manufacturing
process requires heat to facilitate a necessary chemical reaction. This process causes the emissions of
gasses, such as phenol and volatile organic compounds. In 1998, Uniroyal Goodrich installed equipment
to prevent the releases of those compounds to the environment. As a result, the facility was able to cut
more than 95% of its emissions of odors, phenol and volatile organic compounds. In addition, the
manufacturing processes were able to run more efficiently. Their line speeds increased by 10%, which
created higher machine yields, higher labor efficiency and a better product for its customers, all of which
help to increase Michelin's competitive edge. This was the first time a tire cord manufacturing facility had
installed this type of pollution prevention equipment and Uniroyal Goodrich has shown that this
technology can be used with great results throughout the industry sector. Uniroyal Goodrich Tire
Manufacturing has been a member of Businesses for the Say since 1997. For more information, contact
Stan Mcllvain at 804-286-1821.
**********
DAP, Inc.
Baltimore, Maryland
Recipient of the Significant Achievement Award for Medium Business
A recent addition to Businesses for the Bay, DAP, Inc., located in Baltimore, Maryland, employs 170
people in the manufacture of caulks and sealants. To prevent pollution at their facility, DAP, Inc.
switched from the use of solvents for cleaning parts to a high-pressure wash system. This new
system uses hot water rather than chemicals for cleaning. As a result, DAP, Inc. reduced its overall
use of acetone by 16% and reduced its employees' exposure to the solvent. In addition, DAP, Inc.
changed the way it stores its caulks - from small, plastic lined drums to large hoppers. The small,
plastic lined drums created waste, not only of the plastic liners that had to be disposed, but of the raw
product that remained on the plastic. The use of the large hoppers eliminated these waste streams
and saved more than $31,000. DAP, Inc. also implements an active preventative maintenance
program for its liquid tanks and piping systems and recycles plastic, wood and metal scraps. For
more information about DAP, Inc., contact Chris Cool at 410-388-1500.
-------
Winner Profiles
Businesses for the Bay Excellence Awards
Siemens Automotive Corporation
Newport News, Virginia
Recipient of the Outstanding Achievement Award for Large Business
Siemens Automotive Corporation, located in Newport News, Virginia, employs 1,100 people in the
design, development and manufacture of automotive fuel system components, including gasoline fuel
injectors, pressure regulators and fuel rail assemblies. The facility's strong commitment to protecting the
Chesapeake Bay and preventing pollution is evident by its consideration of the environmental impacts
of its products and the processes to manufacture them. One example is found in their new Deka IV fuel
injector. By designing the Deka IV to be much lighter and smaller than the product it replaces, Siemens
Automotive was able to cut scrap wastes from the manufacturing operation by 80%, reducing raw
material usage by 1.5 million pounds. Alternative materials of construction improved the product's overall
corrosion resistance and minimized or eliminated hazardous wastes. It also will facilitate end-of-life
recycling of the product. Siemens Automotive Corporation also utilizes employee teams to identify
pollution prevention opportunities at the facility. In 1998, one team helped the company to reduce its
usage of a cleaning solvent by 82%, saving $93,300. Despite a significant increase in production,
Siemens Automotive reduced its disposal of hazardous waste by 53% in 1998. Siemens Automotive is
one of the original members of Businesses for the Bay, joining in 1996, and actively participates in its
Mentor Program. For more information, contact Barry Marten at 757-875-7303.
**********
Procter & Gamble Cosmetics
Hunt Valley, Maryland
Recipient of the Significant Achievement Award for Large Business
A recent member of Businesses for the Bay, Procter & Gamble Cosmetics has 800 consumer
manufacturing employees in Hunt Valley, Maryland. Procter & Gamble Cosmetic's commitment to
continual improvement and pollution prevention is evident in its development of teams consisting of
employees from various disciplines whose roles are to identify pollution prevention opportunities at the
facility. As a result of this teamwork approach, improvements were made to several of Noxell's batch
cosmetics processes. By improving manufacturing scheduling, Procter & Gamble Cosmetics could run
batches of cosmetics beginning with light colors and progressing to dark colors without having to stop
the manufacturing process. As a result, waste from unused products was reduced, less raw materials
were required, product yields and the number batches that could be manufactured increased, and there
was improvement in the reliability of the products. Procter & Gamble Cosmetics also replaced equipment
with more efficient models and modified existing equipment to run more effectively, which helped to
decrease wastes and the amount of raw material required. Procter & Gamble Cosmetics maintains active
recycling programs and provides Environmental Awareness training for all of its employees. For more
information, contact Curtis Elliott at 410-785-4482.
-------
Winner Profiles
Businesses for the Bay 1999 Mentor of the Year
Denise Jeffries
City of Newport News
Newport News, Virginia
The Mentor of the Year Award is presented annually to an individual who has shown strong leadership,
provided valuable technical assistance to others and recruited new Businesses for the Bay participants.
Denise Jeffries of the City of Newport News, Virginia has been selected as the 1999 Mentor of the Year.
As the City's Commercial Recycling Coordinator, Ms. Jeffries is working to develop a waste exchange
program among the city's and state's business community and to implement the City of Newport News
Environmentally Preferable Procurement Policy. Ms. Jeffries has provided outstanding leadership and
support to the Businesses for the Bay Mentor Program since she volunteered as a Mentor in 1997.
Although Ms. Jeffries works primarily in the recycling field, she fully understands the importance and
profitability of preventing pollution at the source and promotes pollution prevention techniques to the
many businesses in her community by performing waste assessments and employee training. Her work
is not limited by the city's borders, however, as she makes herself available as a resource to businesses
and local governments throughout Virginia and the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Ms. Jeffries recruits
new participants, promotes Businesses for the Bay through articles in newsletters and the local
newspaper, hands out brochures, and includes information about the program in her presentations and
training sessions. She also encourages larger businesses to work cooperatively with smaller businesses
to realize the successes of preventing pollution. For more information about Ms. Jeffries' involvement
in the Mentor Program, contact her at 757-269-2873.
For information about Businesses for the Bay
Contact the Chesapeake Bay Program Office, 1-800 YOUR BAY, x719.
-------
Chesapeake 2000
A Watershed Partnership
Draftfor
Public Review
and Comment
CHESAPEAKE
2000
The Renewed Agreement
DECEMBER 8, 1999
-------
Public Comment Preamble
We are releasing this draft document to solicit your comments. It has been developed
by the Chesapeake Bay Program partners with the assistance ofthonsands of citizens,
scientists and policy makers from throughout the Chesapeake Bay region. It contains
commitments that are far reaching and that address issues of the waters and living
resources of the Bay and its rivers, and the land and air that surround them. It is
intended to take us well into the next decade and beyond.
For the most part, the document represents issues that the signatories believe must
be addressed. In order to finalize our decisions, we must hear from you. Have we
addressed your concerns? Will the Bay and its rivers be better off as a result of the
commitments proposed? We need to hear from you.
Public comment will be received through March 31, 2000. If you would like to assist
us in our consideration of this document, please send us your comments online at
YWVI-'. chssapeakebay. nef or write to:
Chesapeake Bay Program Office
410 Severn Avenue, Suite 109
Annapolis, Maryland 21403
1-800-YOUR-BAY (968-7229)
-------
CHESAPEAKE 2000
A Watershed Partnership
Preamble
J. he Chesapeake Bay is North America's largest and most biologically diverse estuary, home to
more than 3,600 species of plants, fish and animals. For more than 300 years, the Bay and its
tributaries have sustained the region's economy and defined its traditions and culture. It is a
resource of extraordinary productivity, worthy of the highest levels of protection and restoration.
Accordingly, in 1983 and 1987, the states of Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, the District of
Columbia, the Chesapeake Bay Commission and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency signed
historic agreements that established the Chesapeake Bay Program partnership to protect andrestore
the Chesapeake Bay's ecosystem.
For almost two decades, we, the signatories to these agreements, have worked together as stewards
to ensure the public's right to dean water and a healthy and productive resource. We have sought
to protect the health of the public that uses the Bay and consumes its bounty. The initiatives we have
pursued ha\>e been deliberate and ha\'e produced significant results in the health and productivity
of the Bay 's main stem, the tributaries, and the natural land and water ecosystems that compose the
Chesapeake Bay watershed.
While the individual and collective accomplishments of our efforts have been significant, even
greater effort will be required to address the enormous challenges that lie ahead. Increased
population and expanded development within the watershed ha\'e created ever-greater challenges
for us in the Ba)> 's restoration. These challenges are further complicated by the dynamic nature of
the Bay and the ever-changing global ecosystem within which it interacts.
In order to achieve our existing goals and meet the challenges that lie ahead, we must reaffirm our
partnership and recommit to fulfilling the public responsibility we undertook almost two decades
ago. We must manage for the future. We must have a vision for our desired destiny and put
programs into place that will secure it.
-------
To do this, there can be no greater goal in this recommitment than to engage everyone —
individuals, businesses, communities and governments — in our effort; to commit all citizens of the
Chesapeake Bay watershed in a shared vision — a system with abundant, diverse populations of
living resources, fed by healthy streams and rivers, sustaining strong local and regional economies,
and our unique quality of life.
In affirming our recommitment through this new Chesapeake 2000, we recognize the importance of
viewing this document in its entirety with no single part taken in isolation of the others. This
Agreement reflects the Bay's complexity in that each action we take, like the elements of the Bay
itself, is connected to all the others. This Agreement responds to the problems facing this
magnificent ecosystem in a comprehensive, multi-faceted way.
By this Agreement, we commit ourselves to nurture and sustain a Chesapeake Bay Watershed
Partnership and to achieve the goals set forth in the subsequent sections. Without such a
partnership, future challenges will not be met. With it, the restoration and protection of the
Chesapeake Bay will be ensured for generations to come.
WE COMMIT TO:
-------
LIVING RESOURCE PROTECTION AND RESTORATION
The health and vitality of the Chesapeake Bay's living resources provide the ultimate indicator of
our success in the restoration and protection effort. The Bay's fisheries and the other living
resources that sustain them and provide habitat for them are central to the initiatives we undertake
in this Agreement.
We recognize the interconnect edness of the Bay's living resources and the importance of
protecting the entire natural system and therefore, commit to identify the essential elements of
habitat and environmental quality necessary to support the living resources of the Bay. In
protecting commercially valuable species, we will manage harvest levels through practices that
maintain their health and stability and protect the ecosystem as a whole. We will restore passage
for migratory fish and work to ensure that suitable water quality conditions exist in the upstream
spawning habitats upon which they depend.
Our actions must be conducted in an integrated and coordinated manner. They must be
continually monitored, evaluated and revised to adjust to the dynamic nature and complexities of
the Chesapeake Bay and changes in global ecosystems. To advance this ecosystem approach, we
will broaden our management perspective from single-system to ecosystem functions and will
expand our protection efforts from single-species to multi-species management. We will also
undertake efforts to determine how future conditions and changes in the chemical, physical and
biological attributes of the Bay will affect living resources over time.
GOAL: RESTORE, ENHANCE AND PROTECT THE FINFISH, SHELLFISH AND OTHER
LIVING RESOURCES, THEIR HABITATS AND ECOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS
TO SUSTAIN ALL FISHERIES AND PROVIDE FOR A BALANCED ECOSYSTEM.
Oysters
D By 2010, achieve, at a minimum, a tenfold increase in oysters in the Chesapeake Bay,
based upon a 1994 baseline. By 2002, develop and implement a strategy to achieve
this increase by using sanctuaries sufficient in size and distribution, aquaculture and
other management approaches necessary to achieve this objective.
Exotic Species
D By 2002, identify exotic species which are producing significant negative impacts to
the Bay's aquatic ecosystem or have the potential to yield such impacts. By 2004,
develop and implement management plans for those exotic species that are deemed
problematic to the restoration and integrity of the Bay's ecosystem.
-------
D In 2000, establish a Chesapeake Bay Program Task Force to:
1) Work cooperatively with the U.S. Coast Guard, the ports, the shipping industry and
environmental interests at the national level to help establish and implement a national
program designed to substantially reduce and, where possible, eliminate the
introduction of exotic species carried in ballast water; and
2) By 2002, develop and implement an interim voluntary ballast water management
program for the waters of the Bay and its tributaries.
Fish Passage and Migratory Fish and Resident Fish
D By June 2002, identify the final initiatives necessary to achieve our existing goal of
restoring fish passage for migratory fish to more than 1,357 miles of blocked river by
2003.
D By 2004, set a new goal with implementation schedules to achieve restoration of
additional passage for migratory and resident fish.
D For priority migratory fish species, by 2002, assess trends in populations, determine
tributary-specific target population sizes based on projected fish passage and available
habitat, and provide recommendations to achieve those targets.
D By 2003, revise fish management plans to include strategies to achieve tributary-
specific migratory fish target population sizes.
Multi-species Management
D By 2005, develop multi-species management plans for targeted species.
D By 2007, revise and implement existing fisheries management plans to incorporate
ecological, social and economic considerations, multi-species fisheries management
and ecosystem approaches.
Crabs
D Manage the blue crab population to restore a healthy spawning biomass, size and age
structure. By 2001, establish a harvest target and implement state fisheries
management strategies that are complementary Baywide.
-------
VITAL HABITAT PROTECTION AND RESTORATION
The Chesapeake Bay's natural infrastructure is an intricate system of terrestrial and aquatic
habitats, linked to the landscapes and the environmental quality of the watershed. It is composed
of the thousands of miles of river and stream habitat that interconnect the land, water, living
resources and human communities of the Bay watershed. These vital habitats — including open
water, underwater grasses, marshes, wetlands, streams and forests — support living resource
abundance by providing key food and habitat for a variety of species. Submerged aquatic
vegetation reduces shoreline erosion while forests and wetlands protect water quality by naturally
processing the pollutants before they enter the water. Long-term protection of this natural
infrastructure is essential.
In managing the Bay as a whole ecosystem, we recognize the need to focus on the individuality of
each river, stream and creek and to secure their protection in concert with the communities and
individuals that reside within these small watersheds. We also recognize that we must continue to
refine and share information regarding the importance of these vital habitats to the Bay's fish,
shellfish_and waterfowl. Our efforts to preserve the integrity of this natural infrastructure will
protect the Bay's waters and living resources and will ensure the viability of human economies
and communities that are dependent upon those resources for sustenance, reverence and posterity.
GOAL PRESERVE, PROTECT AND RESTORE THOSE HABITATS AND NATURAL
AREAS VITAL TO THE SURVIVAL AND DIVERSITY OF THE LIVING
RESOURCES OF THE BAY AND ITS RIVERS.
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)
D Recommit to the existing SAV Restoration Goal of 114,000 acres.
D By 2002, revise SAV restoration goals to reflect historic abundance, measured as
acreage and density from 1930s to present. The revised goals will include specific
levels of water clarity which are to be met in 2010. Strategies to achieve these goals
will address water clarity, water quality and bottom disturbance.
D By 2002, implement a strategy to accelerate restoration of SAV beds in areas of
critical importance to the Bay's living resources.
Wetlands
D Achieve a no-net loss of jurisdictional wetlands acreage and function through
regulatory programs.
-------
D Achieve a net resource gain by restoring 25,000 acres of tidal and non-tidal wetlands
by 2010. To do this, we commit to achieve and maintain an average restoration rate
of 2,500 acres per year basin wide by 2005 and beyond. We will evaluate our success
in 2005.
D Provide information and assistance to local governments and communities groups for
the development and implementation of locally generated community or watershed-
based wetlands preservation plans. The goal is to have such plans implemented in 25
percent of the land area of each state's Bay watershed by 2010. The plans would
preserve key wetlands that are locally identified and address surrounding land use so
as to preserve wetland functions.
D Continue to evaluate the potential impact of climate change on the Chesapeake Bay
watershed, particularly its wetlands.
Forests
D By 2003, ensure that measures are in place to meet our riparian forest buffer
restoration goal of 2,010 miles by 2010 and determine the potential to significantly
expand this goal.
D Promote the expansion and further linking of contiguous forests through conservation
easements, greenways, fee simple purchase and other land conservation mechanisms.
D Work in partnership with local governments and communities to encourage the
adoption of local stream corridor protection plans that include provisions for riparian
forest conservation and restoration, with a goal of 50 percent local government and
community participation by 2010.
Stream Corridors
D By 2001, each jurisdiction will work with local governments and communities to select
pilot projects that promote stream corridor protection, restoration and the
maintenance of minimum flows.
D By 2003, include in the "State of the Bay Report" and make available to the public,
local governments and communities information concerning the aquatic health of
stream corridors in the watershed, including the minimum freshwater stream flows
needed to maintain or restore aquatic health.
-------
D Work with watershed organizations and local governments to develop a watershed
management plan, that addresses, among other things, the protection of forest buffers
and local stream corridors with a goal of 50 percent local government participation by
2010.
D Continually improve monitoring programs for evaluating the aquatic health of stream
corridors and the success of protection and restoration efforts. Ensure that the
monitoring networks address the critical impact of ground water on surface water flow
and quality.
WATER QUALITY RESTORATION AND PROTECTION
Improving water quality is the most critical element in the overall restoration and protection of the
Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. In 1987, we committed to achieving a 40 percent reduction
in controllable nutrient loads to the Bay. In 1992, we committed to tributary-specific reduction
strategies to achieve this reduction and agreed to stay at or below these nutrient loads once
attained. We have made measurable reductions in pollution loading despite continuing growth
and development. Still, more will have to be done.
Recent actions taken under the Clean Water Act resulted in listing portions of the Chesapeake
Bay and its tidal rivers as "impaired waters." These actions have emphasized the regulatory
framework of the Act along with the ongoing cooperative efforts of the Bay Program as the
means to address the nutrient enrichment problems within the Bay and its rivers. In response, we
have developed, and are implementing, a process for integrating the cooperative and statutory
programs of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. We have agreed to the goal of improving
water quality in the Bay and its tributaries so that these waters may be removed from the
impaired waters list prior to the time when regulatory mechanisms under Section 303(d) of the
Clean Water Act would be applied.
We commit to achieve the water quality conditions necessary to support living resources
throughout the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. In addition, we will make the prevention of pollution
a central theme in the protection of water quality. Where we have failed to achieve established
water quality goals, we will take actions necessary to reach and maintain those goals. We will
complement these efforts with actions that are protective of freshwater flow regimes for riverine
and estuarine habitats. In pursuing the restoration of vital habitats, we will work to improve
water clarity in order to meet light requirements necessary to support SAV. We will develop and
implement improved plans and strategies necessary to reach and maintain those goals. We will
also expand our efforts to reduce sediments and airborne pollution, and ensure that the Bay is free
-------
from the effects of toxics on living resources and human health. We will continue our cooperative
intergovernmental approach to achieve and maintain water quality goals through cost-effective
and equitable means within the framework of federal and state law. We will evaluate the potential
impacts of emerging issues, including airborne ammonia and nonpoint sources of chemical
contaminants. Finally, we will continue to monitor water quality conditions and adjust our
strategies accordingly.
GOAL: ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN THE WATER QUALITY NECESSARY TO SUPPORT
THE AQUATIC LIVING RESOURCES OF THE BAY AND ITS TRIBUTARIES AND
TO PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH.
Nutrients
D Continue efforts to achieve and maintain the 40 percent nutrient reduction goal agreed
to in 1987, as well as the goals being adopted for the tributaries south of the Potomac
River.
D By 2010, correct all nutrient-related problems in the Chesapeake Bay and its tidal
tributaries sufficient to remove the Bay and the tidal portions of its tributaries from the
list of impaired waters under the Clean Water Act. In order to achieve this:
1) By 2001, define the water quality conditions necessary to protect aquatic living
resources; and then, assign load reductions for nitrogen and phosphorus to each
major tributary;
2) By 2002, complete a public process to develop and begin implementation of
revised Tributary Strategies to achieve and maintain the assigned loading goals;
and,
3) By 2003, the jurisdictions with tidal waters will use their best efforts to adopt new
or revised water quality standards consistent with the defined water quality
conditions. Once adopted by the jurisdictions, the EPA will work expeditiously to
review the new or revised standards, which will then be used as the basis for
removing the Bay and its tidal rivers from the list of impaired waters.
Sediment
D By 2010, correct all sediment-related problems in the Chesapeake Bay and the tidal
portion of its tributaries sufficient to remove the Bay and the tidal portions of its
tributaries from the list of impaired waters under the Clean Water Act. In order
achieve this:
-------
1) Using a process parallel to that established for nutrients, determine the load
reductions to achieve the water quality conditions necessary to protect aquatic
living resources and assign load reductions for sediment to each major tributary by
2001; complete tributary strategies to achieve the reductions by 2002; integrate
sediment reductions in order to develop water quality standards for tidal waters by
2003, based upon the defined water quality conditions; and
2) By 2003, work with the Susquehanna River Basin Commission and others to adopt
and begin implementing strategies that prevent the loss of the sediment retention
capabilities of the lower Susquehanna River dams.
Chemical Contaminants
D We commit to fulfilling the 1994 goal of a Chesapeake Bay free of toxics by reducing
or eliminating the input of chemical contaminants from all controllable sources to
levels that result in no toxic or bioaccumulative impact on the living resources that
inhabit the Bay or on human health.
D By Fall of 2000, reevaluate and revise, as necessary, the Chesapeake Bay Basirrwide
Toxics Reduction and Prevention Strategy, focusing on:
1) Complementing state and federal regulatory programs to go beyond traditional
point source controls, including nonpoint sources such as groundwater discharge
and atmospheric deposition by using a watershed-based approach.
2) Understanding the effects and impacts of chemical contaminants to increase the
effectiveness of management actions.
D Through continual improvement, strive for zero release of chemical contaminants
from point sources (including air sources) using voluntary pollution prevention
measures, with particular emphasis on problem chemicals in regions identified to have
probable or potential toxic impacts to living resources.
D Reduce the potential risk of pesticides to the Bay by targeting education, outreach and
implementation of Integrated Pest Management and specific Best Management
Practices on agricultural, urban, suburban and resource lands that have higher potential
for contributing pesticide loads to the Bay.
Priority Urban Waters
D Support the restoration of the Anacostia River, Baltimore Harbor, and Elizabeth River
and their watersheds as models for urban river restoration in the Bay basin.
-------
1) By 2010, the District of Columbia, working with its watershed partners, will
reduce pollution loads to the Anacostia River in order to eliminate public health
concerns and achieve the living resource, water quality and habitat goals of this
and past Agreements.
Air Pollution
D By 2003, assess the effects of airborne nitrogen compounds and chemical
contaminants on the Bay ecosystem and develop a plan for strengthening air emission
pollution prevention programs throughout the airshed.
Boat Discharge
D By 2003, establish appropriate areas within the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries as
''no discharge zones" for human waste from boats. By 2010, expand by 50 percent the
number and availability of waste pump-out facilities.
D By 2006, reassess our progress in reducing the impact of boat waste on the Bay and its
tributaries.
SOUND LAND USE
In 1987, the signatories agreed that "there is a clear correlation between population growth and
associated development and environmental degradation in the Chesapeake Bay system." This
Agreement reaffirms that concept and recognizes that more must be done.
Enhancing, or even maintaining, the quality of the Bay while accommodating growth will
frequently involve difficult choices. It will require a renewed commitment to appropriate
development standards. The states and the federal government will assert the full measure of their
authority to mitigate the potential adverse effects of continued growth. Local jurisdictions have
been delegated authority over many decisions regarding growth and development which have both
direct and indirect effects on the Chesapeake Bay system and its living resources. The role of
local governments in the Bay's restoration and protection effort will be given proper recognition
and support through state and federal resources. States will also engage in active partnerships
with local governments in managing growth and development in ways that support the following
goal.
10
-------
We acknowledge that future development will be sustainable only if we protect our natural and
rural resource land, limit impervious surfaces and concentrate new growth in existing population
centers or suitable areas served by appropriate infrastructure. We will work to integrate
environmental, community and economic goals by promoting more concentrated forms of
development, consistent with our historic urban, village and rural settlement patterns. We will
also strive to coordinate land-use, transportation and infrastructure planning so that funding and
policies at all levels of government do not contribute to poorly planned growth and development
or degrade local habitat. We will advance these policies by creating partnerships with local
governments to protect our communities and to discharge our duties as trustees in the
stewardship of the Chesapeake Bay. Finally, we will report on our progress in achieving our
commitments to promote sound land use every two years.
GOAL: DEVELOP, PROMOTE AND ACHIEVE SOUND LAND USE PRACTICES WHICH
PROTECT AND RESTORE WATERSHED RESOURCES AND WATER QUALITY,
MAINTAIN REDUCED POLLUTANT LOADINGS FOR THE BAY AND ITS
TRIBUTARIES, AND RESTORE AND PRESERVE AQUATIC LIVING RESOURCES.
Land Conservation
D By 2002, expand the use of voluntary and market-based mechanisms such as
easements,_purchase or transfer of development rights and other approaches to
protect and preserve natural resources lands.
D Strengthen programs for land acquisition and preservation within each state that are
supported by funding and target the most valued lands for protection.
D By 2001, complete an assessment of the Bay's resource lands including forests and
farms, emphasizing their role in the protection of water quality and critical habitats,, as
well as cultural and economic viability.
D Provide technical and financial assistance to local governments to plan for or revise
plans, ordinances and subdivision regulations to provide for the conservation and
sustainable use of the forest and agriculture lands.
D Develop and maintain in each jurisdiction a strong GIS system fully accessible to local
governments to promote sound land use practices.
Public Access
D By 2010, expand the system of public access points to the Bay, its tributaries and
related resource sites by 30 percent by working with state and federal agencies, local
governments and stakeholder organizations.
11
-------
D Encourage and support localities in their effort to enhance public access to the Bay
and its tributaries.
D By 2005, increase the number of designated water trails in the Chesapeake Bay region
by 500 miles.
D Enhance outreach materials and opportunities that promote public access to natural,
recreational, historical and cultural resources within the Chesapeake Bay while also
conveying its value.
Development, Redevelopment and Revitalization
D By 2010, reduce in each state the rate of conversion of forest and agricultural lands to
development by at least 30 percent, with progress reported regularly to the
Chesapeake Executive Council.
D Identify and remove state and local impediments to low impact development designs to
encourage the use of such approaches to minimize water quality impacts.
D Work with communities and local governments to encourage sound land use planning
and_practices that address the impacts of growth, development and transportation on
the watershed.
D Review current tax policies to identify elements which discourage sustainable
development practices or encourage undesirable growth patterns. Promote the
modification of such policies and the creation of new tax incentives which encourage
investments consistent with sound growth management principles.
D The jurisdictions will promote redevelopment and remove barriers to investment in
underutilized urban, suburban and rural communities by working with localities and
development interests.
D Provide analytical tools to local governments and communities for watershed-based
assessment of the impacts of growth, development and transportation decisions. Make
available information to encourage the development community and others to
champion the application of sound use practices.
D By 2002, develop information and guidelines to assist local governments and
communities to limit impervious cover on undeveloped and moderately watersheds
and reduce the impact in highly developed watersheds.
Five of the six Bay Program Partnership signatories agree that this commitment should be part of the
Chesapeake 2000 Agreement
12
-------
D By 2003, work with local governments and communities to develop land-use
management and water resource protection approaches that encourage the
concentration of new residential development in areas supported by adequate water
resources and infrastructure to minimize impacts on water quality.
D The jurisdictions will evaluate local implementation of stormwater, erosion control and
other locally-implemented water quality protection programs that affect the Bay
system and ensure that these programs are being coordinated and applied effectively in
order to minimize the impacts of development.
D Develop and promote wastewater treatment options, such as nutrient reducing septic
systems, which protect public health and minimize impacts to the Bay's resources.
D Strengthen brownfield redevelopment. By 2010, rehabilitate and restore 1,050
brownfield sites to productive use.
Transportation
D By 2002, the signatory jurisdictions will promote coordination of transportation and
land use planning to encourage compact development patterns, revitalization in
existing communities and transportation strategies that minimize adverse effects on the
Bay and its tributaries.
D By 2002, each state will coordinate its transportation policies and programs to reduce
the dependence on automobiles by incorporating travel alternatives such as telework,
pedestrian, bicycle and transit options, as appropriate, in the design of projects so as to
increase the availability of alternative modes of travel as measured by increased use of
those alternatives.
D Establish policies and incentives which encourage the use of clean vehicle
technologies.
INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
The Chesapeake Bay is dependent upon the actions of every citizen in the watershed, both today
and in the future. We recognize that the cumulative benefit derived from community-based
watershed programs is essential for continued progress toward a healthier Chesapeake Bay.
-------
Therefore, we commit ourselves to engage our citizens by promoting a broad conservation ethic
throughout the fabric of community life, and foster within all citizens a deeper understanding of
their roles as trustees of their own local environments. Through their actions, each individual can
contribute to the health and well-being of their neighborhood streams, rivers and the land that
surrounds them, not only as ecological stewards of the Bay but also as members of watershed-
wide communities. By focusing individuals on local resources, we will advance Baywide
restoration as well.
We recognize that the future of the Bay also depends on the actions of generations to follow.
Therefore, we commit to provide opportunities for cooperative learning and action so that
communities can promote local environmental quality for the benefit and enjoyment of residents
and visitors. We will assist communities throughout the watershed in improving quality of life,
thereby strengthening local economies and connecting individuals to the Bay through their shared
sense of responsibility. We will seek to increase the financial and human resources available to
localities to meet the challenges of restoring the Chesapeake Bay.
GOAL. PROMOTE INDIVIDUAL STEWARDSHIP AND ASSIST INDIVIDUALS,
COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND
SCHOOLS TO UNDERTAKE INITIATIVES TO ACHIEVE THE GOALS AND
COMMITMENTS OF THIS AGREEMENT.
Public Outreach and Education
D Make public outreach and citizen interaction a priority in order to achieve public
awareness and personal involvement on behalf of the Bay and local watersheds.
D Use the latest communications technologies to provide a comprehensive and
interactive source of information on the Chesapeake Bay and its watershed for use by
public and technical audiences.
D Continue to forge a partnership with the Departments of Education in each jurisdiction
to integrate core messages about the Chesapeake Bay and its watershed into school
curricula.
D Provide students and teachers alike with opportunities to directly participate in local
restoration and protection projects, and to recognize stewardship efforts in schools
and on school property.
D By 2002, expand citizen outreach efforts to incorporate minority populations by
highlighting their cultural and historical ties to the Bay. Emphasis will be placed on
providing multi-lingual educational materials on stewardship activities and Bay
information.
14
-------
Community Engagement
D Jurisdictions will identify small watersheds where community-based actions are
essential to meeting Bay restoration goals - in particular wetlands, forested buffers,
stream corridors and public access and work with local governments and community
organizations to bring the appropriate range of Bay Program resources to these
communities.
D Seek to enhance funding for community-based programs that pursue restoration and
protection projects that will assist in the achievement of the goals of this and past
agreements.
D By 2001, develop and maintain a clearing house for information on local watershed
restoration efforts, including financial and technical assistance.
D By 2002, each signatory jurisdiction will offer easily-accessible information suitable for
analyzing environmental conditions at a small watershed scale.
D By 2002, complete a reevaluation of the Local Government Participation Action Plan
and make necessary changes in Bay Program and jurisdictional functions based upon
the reevaluation.
D Improve methods of communications with and among local governments on Bay
issues and provide adequate opportunities for discussion of key issues.
Government by Example
D Ensure that all properties owned, managed or leased by the signatories are developed
and used in a manner consistent with all relevant goals, commitments and guidance of
this Agreement.
D Ensure that the development, redevelopment, lease and use of signatory jurisdictional
properties and structures are consistent with this Agreement's goals.
D Ensure that the design and construction of signatory-funded development and
redevelopment projects are consistent with all relevant goals, commitments and
guidance of this Agreement.
D Expand the use of clean vehicle technologies and fuels on the basis of emission
reductions, so that a significantly greater percentage of each signatory government's
fleet of vehicles use some form of clean technology.
D Build partnerships with Delaware, New York and West Virginia by promoting
communication and by seeking agreements on issues of mutual concern.
15
-------
' Y THIS AGREEMENT, we rededicate ourselves to the restoration and protection of the ecological
integrity, productivity and beneficial uses of the Chesapeake Bay system. We reaffirm our commitment
to previously-adopted Chesapeake Bay Agreements and their supporting policies. We agree to report
annually to the citizens on the state of the Bay and consider any additional actions necessary.
Pate)
FOR THE CHESAPEAKE BAY COMMISSION
FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND
FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
16
------- |