Then they compare the properties of these pixels through time, to see whether and how they have changed. We know where and when changes have happened. While lower resolution imagery showed about two percent of the The lower-resolution imagery misses outbuildings, sidewalks, narrow roads and other surfaces that do not soak up pollution the way open ground does, but turns it into stormwater runoff instead. Combining detailed land use information with research showing how much nitrogen and phosphorus flows into the bay from different types of landscapes, the team can calculate how much pollution is flowing into each part of the bay watershed, at local, countywide and statewide scales.
Using population and employment projections developed by state agencies and private consultants, the land use model now being finalized projects what types of development are likely to occur in specific areas. To account for potential errors, each model run is repeated times; the results are considered reliable if the same general pattern appears time after time. These research projects, taken together, provide detailed local estimates of the land uses that contribute nitrogen and phosphorus to the Bay, how those pollution loads have changed over time, and how they are likely to change in the future.
The information comes at a critical time. In October, state leaders are expected to take an important next step: Imagine if all the inhabitants of a region went on a permanent diet, agreeing to consume no more than a custom-selected number of calories per day, forever. The states are pledging to achieve those pollution reductions by the year , and maintain them permanently. The challenge is, if you evaluate how effective your TMDLs will be in based on the land uses that are in place today, you will be off by one million people.
And over time, as the population increases, the margin of error increases. To maximize their usefulness, the projections will cover the entirety of each state, including portions that fall outside the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Finally, the group will use the completed computer model to generate new information to help state and local officials understand their options for managing bay pollutants over the long term.
Skip to main content. But 39 percent of nitrogen pollution to the bay still comes from agriculture, about half of that from farm fields.
Just as we're increasing our efforts to slow pollution from sewage plants, stormwater systems and sprawl, we must do more on our farms. Some parts of the farm regulations are laudable.
The rules would prohibit farmers from spreading manure and sewage sludge on the fields in winter when vegetation is not available to take up the nutrients. But other aspects of the farm regulations need improvement. The state should strengthen rules for spreading manure and sludge in the autumn, and eliminate a loophole in a provision governing how close to a stream farmers can spread manure and sludge, among other changes.
- CBF on the Web.
- Call of Destiny (One Small Step out of the Garden of Eden Book 1).
- Old Black Joe!
- Christmas Sauna Traditions?
- 404 NOT FOUND.
- EL PLAN CÓNDOR (Spanish Edition).
- Managing the Chesapeake's Fisheries : A Work in Progress by Edward D. Houde (2011, Hardcover).
Maryland also has proposed new rules on how Baltimore City discharges polluted runoff. Those rules, included in a new permit, need to be strengthened. Create performance standards that ensure specific pollution reductions; require more monitoring and accountability; and make sure that the discharges of runoff from city streets into waterways meet state water quality standards. Strengthening these two regulations will ensure cleaner water, and all the economic and social benefits that flow from that.
Clean water will benefit us and all future generations. If we don't keep making progress, we will jeopardize human health; populations of oysters, rockfish and crabs; and economies that depend on the bay—meaning thousands of jobs. New, stronger regulations also will mean a more equitable sharing of the responsibility of cleaning up the bay and local creeks and rivers.
Many Maryland homeowners already are paying higher fees to upgrade sewage and stormwater systems. Polls say the majority support this effort because it will pay off in the long term. If we are going to finish the job of restoring our national treasure, all Marylanders—farmers, suburbanites and city dwellers alike—must increase their efforts.
The watermen will thank us. Our grandchildren will thank us. A pond and its wildlife suffocated with algae. Photo by Thomas McDowell. In the United States, obesity-related health problems are soaring. The standard revolving door has gone from six to eight feet, and hauling our ampler butts costs airlines a quarter billion more in fuel than it used to.
The proportion of normal weight Americans is at an all-time low. Around the world, coastal waters have gotten fat. Roughly, human obesity and estuarine dead zones both began to proliferate around the s. For all but the last ticks of the evolutionary clock, calories were hard to come by, and calorie burning—physical exertion—was hard to avoid.
Покупки по категориям
Fat was good for other reasons. Human babies are naturally among the fattest of mammalian species, close behind seal pups. The reason appears to be that fat, with 10 times the energy storage of muscle, fuels development of our big brains, themselves about one-third fat. And fat, up to a point, helps the body fight off pathogens, which became a problem once humans began living in settled communities, close to one another and to animals. The authors show that we literally like the feel of fat in our mouths.
Sugar, too, has always been our friend, so much that a bird in Africa, the honeyguide, has evolved to follow honey-seeking humans to the beeswax it eats. The bay also evolved elegantly to do more with less. The watershed for thousands of years was thick with forest, bemucked with beaver ponds and other wetlands, resulting in riverflows that were not just clean, but lean in the nutrients that fuel aquatic food webs.
The Chesapeake thrived fabulously on this diet. Its shallowness, its two-layered flows of freshwater riding atop salt, its structures of filtering shellfish and burrowing worms and clams, its vast grass beds that could absorb and rerelease nutrients—all of this and more enabled the bay to retain and recycle, and recycle again whatever food it could get.
Think of it like swishing a tasty drink around in your mouth for a long time, extracting all of the goodness. Both humans and estuaries in recent decades have entered a world that is nutritionally abundant beyond anything they knew. A diet rich in meat means extensive, intensive, heavily fertilized and fertilizer-leaky agriculture, a major cause of deadzones worldwide.
Even heartier appetites for fossil fuels have fed the bay far too much fertilizing nitrogen via air pollution. With so much energy available to work for us now, we humans must make an effort to get the exercise that used to automatically burn fat. Now they just mainline off pavement into the bay. Distributed by Bay Journal News Service. I have enjoyed the Chesapeake Bay for more than 60 years and written about it for nearly Early in my reporting career, I realized I was covering more than pollution or the vicissitudes of fish and crabs. I had a front row seat to a grand experiment.
We had taken a world-class ecosystem and screwed it up big time, then begun an unprecedented effort to restore it, even as millions more people moved into the watershed.
For better or for worse, we were going to learn some lessons; important for the whole planet. Could an affluent, technologically sophisticated society forge a healthy and sustainable relationship with the rest of nature? No one thought it would be easy or quick. Much has gone in the right direction, offsetting somewhat the increased environmental pressures from a watershed-wide population that has doubled since I was a kid.
Air pollution, a big source of Bay pollution, has decreased. Sewage treatment technology has improved to remove dramatically more nitrogen and phosphorus from waste. Striped bass rebounded handsomely from dangerously low levels, and it seems within our grasp to operate blue crab harvests sustainably. The federal Clean Air Act has real teeth and good science behind it, and pretty good enforcement by the Environmental Protection Agency across state boundaries. The federal Clean Water Act has enough authority over sewage treatment to prod polluting municipalities, with the water and sewer bills users pay providing reliable funding.
With striped bass, strong federal oversight was critical to a species that mostly spawned in the Chesapeake but was overfished throughout its multistate migratory range. With bass and blue crabs, funding good science that included excellent long-term monitoring provided politicians with the backing they needed to make controversial decisions to curtail harvests.
So fund the science, collect the data, strengthen regulatory agencies and federal oversight, then set real deadlines with real penalties. Next election, ask your candidates where they stand on those issues. Across the watershed, 20 percent of all land has been protected as open space using tools ranging from voluntary easements that give up development rights to outright purchase.
Removing subsidies that encourage polluting behavior would work—and save money. But the pushback from two of the biggest Bay problem areas—agriculture and sprawl development—has blown away such easy assumptions. The development industry and its allies continue to own local decision-making bodies where most land-use decisions are made—and made badly for the public interest.
Farmers, who contribute the most pollution to the Bay—and the most cost-effective pollution to curtail—enjoy a good-guy image with the voting public. Most really are good guys who have done many good things for the environment, although too often these are not well-targeted at Bay restoration. To both sprawl and farm runoff we have workable and affordable solutions but not the politics or laws that are up to the task.
More straight talk to the public and farmers is in order. But, in the fourth decade of Bay-saving, we are at least working on almost all of the pieces of the puzzle, from pollution to overfishing to protecting habitat. Is the grand experiment then doomed? I have grown wise enough to spend every moment I can outside exploring this still marvelous region from Cooperstown, N. If readers get one thing from these columns, I would hope for this: Get outdoors, explore and learn what it would mean to live sustainably in this place.
Filling you in on the top stories of the week and letting you know how to make a difference! This week in the Watershed: Hypoxia returns, some much-needed funds, and good crab news. Do you enjoy working with fellow Bay Lovers to help save the Chesapeake? Become a CBF Volunteer to receive notifications about upcoming volunteer opportunities.
Document Display (PURL) | NSCEP | US EPA
In Part I of this two-part series, John Page gives anglers some insight into the images on your sonar fish finders. In Part II he looks at how you can use that information to catch more fish. First, think about what the fish are telling you: This kind of situation calls for precise depth control. Can you cast out a jig, count it down to just above the level where you see them, and swim it back through them? Can you troll a plug or a spoon through them? Think through your options.
404 NOT FOUND
You may just find that the way bad water concentrates fish actually makes it easier to catch them. In the short run, that is. In the long run, though, bad water costs our Bay a huge loss in summertime fish habitat. For one thing, it concentrates fish in thin layers of warm water where diseases like Mycobacteriosis can spread. Between 10 percent and 20 percent of that bad water qualifies as dead zones that are completely off limits to fish and crabs each summer.
Think of having to give up 20 percent of the space in your boat, or in your house, and being uncomfortably stressed in most of the rest of it!
- Dead Zone - Chesapeake Bay Foundation Blog.
- Mapping Chesapeake's Future From Today's Land Use.
- Carry On.
- La Biblia Secreta - Arcana Vulgata (Spanish Edition)?
- lafarge bursary booklet Manual.
Bad water is costing us the resource we love most in our Bay. What causes the bad water problem is pollution, nitrogen pollution to be specific. Too much nitrogen about percent too much, in fact fertilizes the growth of trillions of algae cells. Over the past twenty-five years, many sewage treatment plants have made good progress reducing nitrogen pollution, and so have some farmers. To really make a difference, though, the Bay needs more farmers to participate fully in reducing nitrogen pollution, more sewer authorities to continue their upgrade progress, and most of all, many states, cities, towns, and private citizens to reduce polluting runoff from roadways, parking lots, and rooftops.
Now there are solutions, and Bay anglers can help, big-time. Over the next two months, contact your U. It offers the most important legislative opportunity to reduce runoff pollution to come along in the past thirty-five years. For more information, visit cbf. In this two-part series, John Page gives anglers some insight into the images on your sonar fish finders—what they mean and how you can use that information to catch more fish.
This image shows dense schools of bait fish mostly menhaden and some larger fish probably rockfish suspended high in the water column over 40 feet of water in the Severn River, about a mile above the Route 50 bridge in Annapolis, Maryland, on August 1,
Related Managing the Cheapeakes Fisheries: A Work in Progress (Chesapeake Perspectives)
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved