Fish Commision erges the US EPA for help with the Susquehanna river

Fredrick

Fredrick

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
4,433
Location
DELCO
HARRISBURG, Pa. (July 29) – The Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC) today called on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to help identify the factors contributing to the poor health of the Susquehanna River and begin taking steps to improve the river’s condition “before it becomes too late to repair the damage.”
In a July 28 letter to EPA Administrator Shawn Garvin, Executive Director John Arway said the agency supports the EPA’s recent decision to increase oversight of pollutants from the agricultural sector in Pennsylvania’s portion of the Chesapeake Bay, but said more needs to be done.

“While large strides have been made in other sectors, the agricultural sector has been more complicated to understand and subsequently account for in regulatory improvements,” Arway said. “Further investigation into the agricultural contribution will be challenging but one that is much needed and long overdue.”

In particular, Arway urged the EPA to establish thresholds for reducing the amount of dissolved phosphorus, which he said is “plaguing the water quality” of the Susquehanna River and the Chesapeake Bay.

“While target parameters such as total nitrogen and total phosphorus are important in estuarine management, I strongly recommend that EPA’s upcoming focus include targets specifically for the Susquehanna River, a riverine environment that’s the bay’s largest tributary,” he said. “These would include the dissolved components of phosphorus which are fueling algal blooms and increased productivity in the Susquehanna River and its tributaries creating the primary stressor that cause young bass immune systems to be stressed, the fish to become weakened, then become infected with bacteria and die.”

Arway said that specific recommendations which would have far-reaching impacts to improve the Susquehanna if enacted statewide include:

Avoid agricultural applications of phosphorus in the autumn.
Reduce the phosphorus load delivered during the spring period (March 1 to June 30).
Increase the scale and intensity of agricultural Best Management Practices (BMP) programs that have been shown to reduce phosphorus runoff.
Strengthen and increase the use of regulatory mechanisms of conservation farm planning to reduce nutrient loadings.
Accelerate 4Rs (Right source, Right rate, Right time and Right place) outreach/extension programs and phase in mandatory certification standards for agrology advisors, retailers and applicators to ensure fertilizer is applied based on the 4Rs.
Ban the application of manure, biosolids and commercial fertilizers containing phosphorus from agricultural operations on frozen ground or ground covered by snow.
Work with local governments to promote and accelerate use of green infrastructure (such as filter strips, rain gardens, bio-swales and engineered wetlands).
Prohibit the sale and use of phosphorus fertilizers for lawn care.
A complete copy of Executive Director Arway’s letter to the EPA is available on the PFBC website.

More information about the Susquehanna River impairment is also available on the website.

Media Contact
Eric Levis, Press Secretary
717.705.7806
elevis@pa.gov
 
Hmm only took 'em 'bout ten years to admit they have no clue...
 
Along with agricultural pollution, I believe more data needs to be collected on the effects that "waste" pharmaceuticals are having on he river system. USGS studies are finding fish that have both sex characteristics, and many of the diseases plaguing smallmouths are linked to endocrine disruption. Just think about how much of the birth control drugs are polluting water world wide because no sewer treatment system can remove them from the water... Then take into consideration every other left over pill that is flushed down the toilet, this has went on for decades. Who knows that might have a more harmful effect on aquatic life than agricultural runoff. I'm not trying to down grade the importance of reducing nutrient pollution because it is important, but it would be very interesting to understand how our drugs have impacted the water and aquatic life.
 
Dear JG,

They knew the all answers 10 years ago.

Fish, and fishermen don't have lobbying interests, agriculture does.

That's everything you need to know in the simplest terms.

Money + votes > fish and fishermen

The fish, and the river will lose.

Regards,

Tim Murphy :)
 
Back
Top