ABOUT

Smart discussion of the latest science and news on toxins in your food, water, and air, and what government agencies should be doing to protect public health. Enviroblog is a project of EWG Action Fund.

Read about our authors.

FEED

 Subscribe in a Reader

Subscribe by Email

An EWG podcast for environmental health news on the go.

TWITTER UPDATES

TIPS

Did we miss something? Email Enviroblg.

BLOGROLL

STAY CONNECTED

Get our monthly eNewsletter, action alerts, & environmental tips. [Privacy policy, About EWG]

Consumers to FDA: Be there or be square

Relax, it's baby safety month

Toxic cosmetics in teenage girls

FEATURED

Elected officials MIA; Instead Wal-Mart and Burger King protecting your health

Back to school: Are we ready? Are we non-toxic?

Fire retardants: Disproportionate risk to small children

Lead: Celebrate its ban, but don't cross it off your list

Cheatsheet: Bisphenol A

7 ways to reduce your exposure to PBDEs

Ask EWG

What can I do about fluoride in my water?

What is new carpet treated with? What can I do?

What is "fragrance"?

Which infant formula is best?

Are stainless steel water bottles safe?

Is mineral-based makeup safer?

SEARCH

ARCHIVE

select month September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004

« SMM: ZapRoot and Mixed Greens | Main | White House worked to weaken pollution reporting for communities »

A turning point for the Chesapeake Bay?

By Michelle

Last December, the Maryland legislature approved a new $50 million “Chesapeake Bay 2010 Trust Fund” to help clean up the decades-dirty Bay. The “2010 Trust Fund” will provide money to help move the state closer to achieving water quality goals set back in 2000 by the 2010 deadline. Everyone has accepted these goals will not be achieved in time, but public trust in the state’s ability to even make a dent is waning.

This year, state officials have a chance to strengthen public confidence that they are actually doing everything they can to clean up the Bay by announcing they will spend the Fund using a “cost-effectiveness” principle. Though seemingly simple and straightforward, this common sense approach to spending the public’s money is a radical departure from the past when funds were largely distributed on a first-come, first-share basis.

Among the various options for reducing the nutrient pollution ailing the Bay, agricultural best management practices deliver the biggest bang for the nutrient-reduction buck. That means Maryland’s farm conservation programs should get most (if not all) of the Fund. But in order to truly have an impact, Maryland’s farm conservation programs should spend the fund in the most cost-effective way they can. Maryland’s agriculture, environment, and natural resource agencies should commit to following a three-step approach:

1. Identify and prioritize the highest nutrient loading watersheds,
   
2. Identify and prioritize the highest nutrient loading farmland locations within the
   priority watersheds,
   
3. Identify and prioritize implementation of the most cost-effective and site-appropriate conservation practices.
   

Only by targeting the new funds to achieve the most nutrient reductions per dollar will the Chesapeake Bay have a chance to recover.

Photo by Slack12 (Licence)

« SMM: ZapRoot and Mixed Greens |