The health of the Chesapeake Bay in 2020 improved to a grade of a C, up slightly from a C-minus in 2019, according to a report that the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science (UMCES) released on Tuesday.
The bay’s watershed, which feeds into the Chesapeake Bay and encompasses parts of six states and Washington, D.C., received a B-minus score for the second year in a row on its health report card.
But environmental advocates said progress to improve the health of the Chesapeake Bay and watershed are moving too slow to reach a key 2025 deadline.
In December 2020, the U.S. The Environmental Protection Agency established the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load agreement among Maryland; Delaware; Virginia; West Virginia; Washington, D.C.; Pennsylvania; and New York who each make up part of the more than 64,000 square miles that the Chesapeake Bay watershed covers.
The agreement identifies major contributors of pollution to the Chesapeake Bay and sets limits to restore the bay and its tidal rivers by 2025.
Alison Prost, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s Vice President for Environmental Protection and Restoration, said in a statement that the UMCES report confirms “we are far short of a restored Bay.”
To reach the 2025 deadline, Prost said state and federal governments must “accelerate efforts to reduce pollution or Bay restoration efforts are in jeopardy.”
“The federal partners in Bay restoration must step up to the plate,” Prost said. “EPA must hold the states accountable for meeting their requirements. And since agriculture is being counted on for more than 80 percent of the pollution reduction still needed, USDA must deliver more conservation funding and technical assistance to the region.”
The University of Maryland report lists 11 indicators of the Chesapeake Bay’s health, although the scientists only scored eight of those indicators: overall health index, dissolved oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorous, chlorophyll A, water clarity, aquatic grasses, and benthic community. The levels of blue crab, bay anchovy and striped bass populations in the bay were not scored.
The scientists gave percentage scores to the Chesapeake Bay overall and individually to 13 areas that the bay comprises: Upper Bay, Mid Bay, Lower Bay, Upper Eastern Shore, Lower Eastern Shore, Choptank River, Patapsco and Back Rivers, Patuxent River, Potomac River, Rappahannock River, York River, James River, and Elizabeth River.
Percentage scores ranged from “very good” (80-100%) to “very poor” (0-20%).
Overall, the Chesapeake Bay earned a score of 45%, up slightly from 44% in 2019.
Dissolved oxygen levels, or how much oxygen is in the water, were “very good” for the Chesapeake Bay overall and in most individual areas, although the Mid Bay, Upper Eastern Shore, York River scored slightly lower in the 60-80% range. Meanwhile, the Patapsco and Back Rivers scored even lower in the 40-60% range.
Nitrogen and phosphorous levels were both fairly good in the Mid Bay and Lower Bay areas. But the report found weak points in other parts of the bay, including “very poor” levels of nitrogen in the Upper Bay, as well as “very poor” levels of phosphorus in the Lower Western Shore, Patuxent River, and York River.
Runoff from fertilizers, which contain nitrogen, phosphorus and other minerals, can lead to excess nutrients in water bodies, resulting in algal blooms, reduced oxygen levels in water, and disruptions to ecosystems.
The report found that nitrogen and phosphorous scores overall for the bay have shown significant improvement over time, although the scientists acknowledged that a monitoring gap from March-May 2020 may have affected both indicators.
Levels of chlorophyll A, which helps facilitate plant photosynthesis, scored “very poor” across most areas of the bay. The Upper Bay, York River and Elizabeth River scored in the 20-40% range, while the James River scored in the 40-60% range.
Water clarity scores were also “very poor” across nearly all areas of the bay. The Upper Bay scored slightly higher than the other areas, with a score in the 20-40% range.
Indicators related to the benthic community — which includes organisms that live on or near the bottom of rivers, streams and other water bodies — and aquatic grasses both presented a mixed bag across the various areas of the bay.
The Upper Bay, for example, earned a score in the 60-80% range for the aquatic grasses and benthic community indicators. But the Mid Bay scored “very poor” in the 0-20% range for both indicators.
The report also gave a B-minus score, the same as in 2019, to the health of the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
The watershed’s health report card was based on 10 indicators: overall health index, nitrogen, phosphorus, benthic community, protected lands, turbidity, stewardship, social index, walkability, and heat vulnerability index.
This year’s report includes new indicators related to social and economic factors, including the social index, walkability, and heat vulnerability index. University System of Maryland graduate students are developing an environmental justice index, and next year’s report will add more indicators to address economic disparities.
“Improvements in our environment go hand-in-hand with improvements in our communities, particularly those that are traditionally disadvantaged,” UMCES President Peter Goodwin said in a statement.
The Middle Potomac, including D.C. and parts of Maryland and Virginia, earned the highest walkability score. The Lower Susquehanna — which covers parts of central Maryland and the Eastern Shore — and the Patapsco and Back Rivers — which includes Baltimore’s Inner Harbor and other parts of the city and central Maryland — also earned “very good” walkability scores.
But the walkability of the Lower Potomac, which includes parts of Virginia and Southern Maryland south of D.C., scored “very poor.”
The Choptank area of the watershed, including parts of the Eastern Shore, scored “very poor” for stewardship. No part of the watershed scored higher than 60% in that indicator.
U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said in a statement that he is glad to see the bay’s health gradually improve and the watershed’s health hold steady, but he added “there’s a lot more to do.”
“I will continue working to provide vital funding and to hold all partner states accountable as we work together to reduce pollution, address environmental injustice, and meet our mutual goals of clean water in the Chesapeake Bay by 2025,” Van Hollen said.
U.S. Rep. John Sarbanes (D-Md.), who co-chairs the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Task Force, said in a statement that the region has “lots of work ahead” but he is “confident that our shared commitments will help ensure that the Chesapeake Bay remains one of America’s great environmental treasures for generations to come.”
