BALTIMORE (AP) - Most streams in the Chesapeake watershed are in poor condition, according to data released Monday by the Chesapeake Bay Program.
The federal and state partnership that coordinates restoration efforts, also released data showing reductions in key pollutants over the past 25 years at monitoring sites along tributaries that feed the Chesapeake, but noted levels were still below restoration goals.
The stream survey involved sampling of nearly 8,000 streams sites between 2000 and 2008 and found 54 percent were in poor or very poor condition while 27 percent were in excellent or good condition.
Peter Tango, Chesapeake Watershed Coordinator for the U.S. Geological Survey, said the monitoring shows a clear link between land use and stream quality with those in urban, farming and mining areas faring the worst.
Chesapeake Bay Foundation scientist Beth McGee said the findings show the fragile nature of streams, and how small amounts of development can affect them.
Paved surfaces covering as little as 5 percent to 10 percent of an area can affect nearby streams, and urban areas such as Baltimore and Washington can often have 30 percent to 50 percent, McGee said.
More
The stream survey involved sampling of nearly 8,000 streams sites between 2000 and 2008 and found 54 percent were in poor or very poor condition while 27 percent were in excellent or good condition.
Peter Tango, Chesapeake Watershed Coordinator for the U.S. Geological Survey, said the monitoring shows a clear link between land use and stream quality with those in urban, farming and mining areas faring the worst.
Chesapeake Bay Foundation scientist Beth McGee said the findings show the fragile nature of streams, and how small amounts of development can affect them.
Paved surfaces covering as little as 5 percent to 10 percent of an area can affect nearby streams, and urban areas such as Baltimore and Washington can often have 30 percent to 50 percent, McGee said.
More
6 comments:
I wonder how many of the streams on the Western Shore compared to the Eastern Shore are in poor condition? If you read the whole article they still seem like they want to implicate the farmers and septic systems. Go figure as the businesses on the Western Shore can afford Lobbyists to keep them exempt.
yeah and I love how they say 30 million pounds of this item and 27 millions pounds of this were dumped into the bay. so do tell me who's out there with a scale and just how are they able to weigh how much was dumped into the bay?
We know the bay is in bad shape, but throwing around numbers like this doesn't help.
Sounds like a lot bs!
1008-Both those on the Eastern and Western shores have to get past fingerpointing. Also, other states who's tributaries run into the bay are to blame as well. Stop with the finger pointing and start the process of enviromental recovery. You can blame the Western shore, they can blame the Eastern shore. Until both actually make positive contributions instead of negative impacts on the Bay...Nothing will improve.
12:57 It comes down to that we mean nothing to them and they make all of the rules. We do comply but they do nothing on their side of the bay. They need to be aggressive with the biggest waste contributers which happen to be on the Western Shore but they don't. I'm pointing and won't stop until they start fixing their own issues. The Eastern Shore is a small contributer compared to them.
320-So...I guess it's the Western shore's fault the Eastern Shore has such high cancer rates? Come on now. Look around, wearing blinders doesn't solve anything. I grew up on the Shore, and I'll always consider it home. Next door neighbor died of brain cancer, the neighbor behind us, first their father died, then their son that I grew up with, passed away in high school from leukemia. To say there aren't problems with farm runoff(or, what's put into the soil) on the Shore is sugarcoating a cancerous tumor. Compare our rates to the rest of the nation, and open your damn eyes. Whatever is causing such incredible cancer rates can't be good for a water supply/river/bay either.
by following the link and then to the map, one will see that the poorest conditions come from the Balto-Washington and northeast bay. However, there's a big red blotch on the Blackwater Refuge area as well. Norfolk is also a red blotch, and so is the southern tip of the shore at the other end of the Bridge- Tunnel, but I expect this may be tidal backwash from Norfolk more than anything.
Either way, the rest of the populated areas, including the Shore, show very little to no "green" good to best water quality, and we all should try to improve this.
Post a Comment