More Bad News for Barnegat Bay – Ecological Indicators At Record Lows
[Update below]
Kirk Moore reports on Rutgers professor Mike Kennish’s latest Report on the continuing declining ecological health of Barnegat Bay (See: “State of the Bay Report: 2011“)
New bay study cites declining trends
Underwater seagrass meadows in Barnegat Bay have lost 50 percent to 88 percent of their plant mass since 2004, a measure that researchers say is a critical indicator of the bay’s declining health.
The seagrass situation is a big part of the 2011 State of the Bay report being presented today at Ocean County College in Toms River. Of 19 key health indicators selected by the report authors, 11 have shown no improvement or are in decline.
These findings come as no suprise to anyone who is paying attention to the health of the Bay.
No, what surprises me is that despite years of compelling science on the Bay’s decline, many remain in denial (or worse) or are diverted by focusing on the wrong indicators.
For example, compare the interpretation and characterization of the data from Barnegat Bay Partnership Director Hales and Rutgers Professor Kennish.
Here’s what Hales had to say:
“It’s more bad news than good news. But the report is what it is. It shows us the way to move forward” said Stan Hales, executive director of the Barnegat Bay Partnership,
Note how he downplays the concern (it is what it is?) and implies some kind of balance or good side of the story (more bad than good).
This Report is a devastating indictment of management failure of the voluntary and locally driven Barnegat Bay Partnership model that Stan directs.
It is not Stan’s fault – he just lacks the financial and regulatory tools to get the job done. Voluntary local efforts simply can not control land use and pollution problems that are causing the Bay’s decline.
It’s time for Stan to admit that.
A similarly frank assessment of the dire implications of continued reliance on voluntary local control are what led to NJ’s nationally recognized regional management progams in the Pinelands and Highlands.
Limitations of local effort are why we have national laws, like the Clean Water Act, and regulatory programs, like the TMDL.
Now compare Stan’s tepid bad news/good news reaction with Rutgers professor Kennish:
Those values have declined to the lowest levels ever measured, said Michael Kennish, a research professor with the Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences at Rutgers University.
The average weight per square meter (a sample grid about three feet square) “in 2010 was the lowest on record,” said Kennish, whose latest paper is included in today’s conference.
When 2010 and 2004 seagrass data are compared, researchers see the leafy parts of the plants in the water declined 87.3 percent over those years, while the root systems in the bay bottom were 64.7 percent less by weight, Kennish said.
“This is a huge hit, a huge decline” Kennish added
And not all 19 indicators are equally important in measuring the health of the Bay. Kennish is focused on the key indicators, all of which are in serious decline.
But another problem is that DEP water quality standards and monitored indicators are far less important or outright misleading, which suggest that the Bay is improving.
An absurd indicator monitored by DEP is acres of harvestable shellfish beds, a regulatory classification that also suggests things are improving – yet the shellfish that live there are in steep decline!
DEP also likes to focus on another ecologically less relevant indicator, bathing beach closings, which is not in decline and also gives misleading and false positive news.
DEP has the regulatory tools and financial resources to tackle the job. But, as an excuse to do nothing and avoid tough decisions, they literally have been looking the other way as the Bay dies.
This DEP abdication lets Governor Christie play misleading political games with his 10 Point Plan, which is nothing but more of the same failed status quo.
This Report shows us another nail in the coffin.
And what happens as even more land is converted to development and pollutant loadings continue to INCREASE?
We may be approaching (or have passed) an ecological tipping point that will result in collapse of biological functions in the Bay.
If so, nuisance jellyfish will look like a minor issue and some real nasty organisms could emerge, making the Bay a stagnant putrescent pool, kind of a liquid landfill.
If that happens, what do you think happens to the property value of all those Bay homes? What happens to the value of homes near a stinking landfill?
What happens to all those local businesses that depend on boating, fishing, swimming, and tourism?
Forgetaboudit.
The Barnegat Bay Partnership lacks the tools to get the job done. Chrisite’s 10 Point Pan lacks the tools to get the job done.
Let’s agree and deploy more effective existing tools under the Clean Water Act and the full arsenal of DEP regulatory programs.
The below finding from the Report makes the case for enforcement of the Clean Water Act via a TMDL, which provides the management tools and would provide the data and science on nitrogen sources and loadings:
But to plan restoration efforts for the bay, better estimates are needed to help assess the importance of nitrogen sources within the watershed.
[Update – I just read the Report. It is a high quality product and it paints a devastating picture. Almost all of the 19 indicators selected are the right ones. The only good news I take away from the Report is that about 35% of the tributary streams are still healthy with good water quality. Those streams need to be saved, but, lack of effective land use controls will not do the job. A major effort in reducing allowable impervious cover under CAFRA and addressing cumulative impacts are required. More Category One 300 foot buffers are required. Similarly, declining freshwater inputs is a bad and worsening problem. It can be addressed by more restrictive DEP water allocation and NJPDES water reuse mandates. Again, the tools exist, but DEP needs to step up to the plate. The BBay Partneship can not do this.