Federal Agencies Deliver Reports on Chesapeake Bay Cleanup

Looking for Input from Farming Community

Ayleen Stellhorn
Southcentral Pa. Correspondent

GETTYSBURG, Pa. — An executive order that includes higher standards for continued improvement in the water quality of the Chesapeake Bay may have far-reaching implications for the 70,000 to 80,000 farms in the bay’s watershed.

At an outreach session here last week, federal officials presented an overview of Proposal 202a — draft reports that focus on the nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment levels in the bay and target agriculture and urban-suburban development for reform — and asked for input.

“We’re specifically seeking comments from the farming community because we realize that fulfilling these goals may impact their operations,” said Dana D. York, senior adviser of the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)/Chesapeake Bay Program.

Chuck Fox, special assistant to the EPA administrator for the Chesapeake Bay, noted that the federal government would prefer to cooperate with state-level programs that are already having a positive impact on the bay’s water quality.

“It’s no fun doing federal rulemaking,” Fox said. “We’d rather work with the states to find ways to make this work without federal regulations.”

The outreach session was held in response to Executive Order 13508, which was signed May 12 by President Barack Obama to accelerate the clean up of the Chesapeake Bay by focusing on improved performance and better accountability, and to establish a federal leadership committee chaired by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The reports outline specific steps that federal agencies could take to meet standards that would clean up the bay by 2025. 

“This is nothing short of a daunting task,” Fox said. “And it will require changing patterns of the last 30 years. We need concrete results for people in this watershed.”

Fox noted that scientists have been studying the Chesapeake Bay for the past 30 years to define criteria for water quality standards, like dissolved oxygen and water clarity.

“The best data we have says what we’re doing is working. Agriculture loads to the Chesapeake Bay are decreasing,” Fox said. “Urban and suburban loads are increasing.”

Despite efforts to stop farm-based contaminants from reaching the bay, agricultural operations in the 64,000-square-mile watershed are still a significant source of nitrogen and phosphorus, Fox said. The latest recommendation is that a 200-million-pound nitrogen reduction is necessary for ultimate water quality standards in the bay.

York used several topographical maps of the watershed’s six-state region to show the current high-risk areas for soil leaching and soil runoff. She noted that runoff is a greater problem here, where farming takes place along the sides of ridges and valleys, and it’s also easier to control than leaching.

Two practices being explored are the tightening of animal feeding regulations and better management of land applications of manure. Other best management practices (BMPs) encouraged by the NRCS include stream fencing and off-stream watering.

“Some of the things we’re looking at won’t come as a surprise to you,” York said, listing cover crops, buffers, and the timing, rate and method of manure application.

The NRCS’s proposed strategy is targeting, which means “fixing the worst first in order to lower the baseline of the whole agricultural impact on the bay,” York said.

Prior to 2008, 51 percent of funds went to “worst first” farms in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. In 2009, the first year that targeting was implemented through the Farm Bill program, that number jumped to 75 percent. York said the future goal is to see 100 percent of the funding — $70 million in 2011 and $50 million in 2012 through the NRCS Farm Bill program — spent in priority watersheds.

The NRCS also wants to establish better monitoring in target areas. The bay model now uses census information, “but that doesn’t tell the whole story,” she said. “We need to include everything farmers are doing — even those who are taking action on a voluntary basis — to better inform the model.”

Specific concerns brought up during the outreach session included the following:

• the need for more one-on-one technical assistance;
• a way to reach out to independent farmers, small farmers, and those not currently involved in the program;
• a training program for new government hires who will work with farmers;
• the need for a simpler way to work with the NRCS;
• the amount of money farmers need for equipment (for example, no-till) to put BMPs in place;
• the tendency to overlook the accomplishments of farmers who are currently working within guidelines of strict state regulations (for example, Virginia);
• the need to control fertilizers and other additives before they reach the farm;
• the fear that a solution for the bay may turn into another problem (i.e., added transportation or incineration of manure may create greenhouse gases);
• the possibility of implementing self-certification;
• the addition of a “green” label for products, similar to “organic”;
• a way to shield those who offer information from becoming targets.

Public comment on the reports takes place between Nov. 9 and Jan. 9 at http://executiveorder.chesapeakebay.net. For more information, contact your local NRCS office.