Muckraker: Riverkeeper's crusade to save Chesapeake Bay from sediment

When the utility companies apply for relicensing, that's when the government "blackmails" these companies to do what they want in order to get the renewal. The consumer pays for that with higher electric costs.

mike, how do you make a living

The erosion of soil during a rain event and the soils movement downstream are a natural process. The dam has interrupted the natural balance of things. The dam on the positive side has prevented many pollutants from reaching the bay.

Poor watershed management in the age of suburbanization has led to an urban stream syndrome were abnormal peak levels during heavy rainfall events cause greater than normal erosion. Higher faster moving streams scour the banks of streams at an accelerated rate.

The county or Helfrich should see if stimulus money can be acquired to dredge the dam. Then we need to realize that unless proper steps are taken further upstream the problem will just reemerge in several years. I would like to see wetlands created upstream that absorb the muck and through a process help eliminate some of the deadlier chemical compounds.

I'll take the easy question first. WTF, I work for a non-profit, membership organization, Stewards of the Lower Susquehanna(SOLS). All of our expensives for our office, my salary, the wages of two part-time employees, and our activities,(a total of about $100,000 per year) are paid for through memberships, donations, and foundation grants. If you'd like to learn more and/or help, you can join SOLS or make a donation at www.LowerSusquehannaRiverkeeper.org . Thanks.

Play Ball, these are some great comments. York County, some municipalities, and privately/publicly funded individuals (such as Jake Romig, our new York County Watershed Circuit Rider) are seeking and have been seeking to assist landowners with improving their properties through grants and land preservation programs (including wetlands protection).

As far as public funding for sediment removal, when we get a general agreement on a plan to address the dam sediment, it will still be 5 to 10 years before all plans, approvals, and preparations are ready for "shovel-ready" funding. There is no doubt that the public will have to finance much of this (though I'm trying to reduce this cost by finding uses that would add value to the sediment). Then again, this is a problem that many of us helped create, whether directly, or indirectly through artificially lower prices on food, development, and electricity. Much of the sediment and pollutants come from farms that have allowed sediment and pesticides to wash off the land, cheaper development practices that allow sediment to wash off the properties, and cheap coal that brought us between 11 and 17% of the muck behind Conowingo. When we pollute and ignore the future costs of dealing with the pollution, these are externalized costs. If a business does it, they can keep their prices lower for competition. As consumers we think we are getting a good deal, but the public always ends up paying in the long run. If we would be honest about these costs up front, you would see a very different economy, one that would reduce waste and pollution purely on business principles.

Tom, as far as blackmailing, I think you have it backwards. My job is to reduce the costs to the public by reducing damages to public property (our creeks, rivers, and the Chesapeake Bay). The Chesapeake watermen have lost $600 million in crab production in the last 10 years. Oysters are almost gone from the Bay. The Susquehanna used to have multi-million dollar Shad and American Eel fisheries that have been lost due to the dams. These all used to be thriving parts of our economy that have been lost due to putting cheap electricity above other uses of our waterways, such as food production.

I am not an avid fisherman; but have an interest in fish caught near the Conowingo Dam. Since this blog appears to be moderated by a knowledgeable source I would like to pose a question. I am specifically interested in the sex of the fish being caught above the Conowingo Dam?

Fish caught along the Potomac River have developed hermaphroditic features due to either pollutants from farms, compounds found in asphalt or pharmaceutical companies dumping pollutants in the river. I imagine if there is a relation to farming chemicals or asphalt the hermaphroditic fish should be found at this location due to the accumulation of these contaminants in the environment.

Play Ball,

I'm not the moderator, but I am the Lower Susquehanna Riverkeeper, so I will update you on what I know about intersex, or "gender-bending" in Susquehanna Smallmouth Bass. Samples of 150 male Smallmouth were taken by USGS and tested for intersex. Nearly every male bass tested had immature eggs, or oocytes, in their testes. AND there were more oocytes per male fish than in the Potomac where it is being studied. I'll be putting up some new information soon.

I can't say anything specific to Conowingo, but the intersex Smallmouth are being found throughout the Susquehanna, but not in the Delaware or Allegheny. This leads me to believe that a major contributor to the problem is PROBABLY agriculture. I have been requesting funding from Congress to give to USGS to do further studies on this, including measuring the amounts of different pesticides in the specimens.

Again, you can read more on this issue at www.LowerSusquehannaRiverkeeper.org

wtf wrote:

mike, how do you make a living

He makes his living from what you read in the YDR. That's IT!