Protecting the bay
Lawsuit aims to compel EPA to reach cleanup targets for the Chesapeake
The Environmental Protection Agency has failed woefully in its responsibility to protect the Chesapeake Bay. So the attorneys general of Virginia, Maryland, Delaware and the District of Columbia have filed a lawsuit to force it to do its job, and so have the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and others.
It’s a shame that legal action is needed to make an important federal agency do what it’s supposed to, but that’s the reality.
Ideally, the filing of the two lawsuits early in September would be enough to finally make things happen. But don’t count on that. The Trump administration has been on a campaign to reverse much of the environmental progress made in recent decades, and today’s EPA has been part of a wholesale gutting of environmental regulations and protections. The administration has also tried annually to slash funds for the Chesapeake Bay Program.
If necessary, the courts should rule quickly to make the EPA enforce the plan that has been put in place to require states in the watershed to reduce the pollution that’s poisoning the bay.
Quick action is essential, because it’s much easier to pollute waters than it is to clean them up and revive dying populations of plants, fish, shellfish and all that makes the Chesapeake Bay a vital part of the economy and quality of life in the region, and a recognized national treasure.
After years of decline, in recent years the bay has been making an encouraging recovery from the near-death condition it was in because of human actions and inactions — toxic runoff, careless farming practices, thoughtless development, destruction of wetlands and forests, and failure to make changes.
Much of the recent recovery is the result of an agreement among the six states and the District that make up the watershed to work together to significantly cut the amount of pollutants flowing into the bay. More than 10 years ago, the states signed on to a Clean Water blueprint and promised to fully implement stringent pollution controls by 2025. They agreed to work with the nonprofits and agencies that were already working to save the bay.
Virginia and Maryland are, for the most part, on track to meet their goals for reducing pollution by 2025. That’s important, because they are two of the three states that have been contributing about 90% of the pollution in the bay.
The third state that has been among the worst polluters is Pennsylvania, and, unfortunately, Pennsylvania and New York have not produced plans that will enable them to meet their goals. The lawsuits say that plans approved by the EPA in December would enable Pennsylvania to meet only 74% of its goal for reducing nitrogen by 2025, and New York would meet only 66% of its goal.
The lawsuits want the EPA to make those states meet their requirements for reducing pollutants.
The EPA now says that it is “fully committed to working with our Bay Program partners to meet the 2025 goals.”
We’d feel more confident about that statement if plans to make that happen had been approved for the two states. Neither Pennsylvania nor New York borders the bay, but the Susquehanna River, which rises in New York and flows through Pennsylvania, pours lots of pollution into its waters.
It’s critically important for every state to at least meet those 2025 goals. Meeting the goals might not be sufficient. The Chesapeake Bay Foundation has called for states, including Virginia, to do what it takes to keep existing pollution-reduction programs going and to develop more effective, longer-range strategies.
The recovery that’s happened so far is fragile, threatened by continued growth and development in the watershed states and by climate change, which brings more frequent, intense storms and rising sea levels.
The Chesapeake Bay is an irreplaceable treasure. Its health is essential for Virginia, but its value extends far beyond this region. The Environmental Protection Agency should be exerting all its power and authority to save the bay.