Pa. moves water quality and saving the Chesapeake 'to the front burner'

There was brief, but spirited, celebration among those who advocate for the Chesapeake Bay and have been working for years to get Pennsylvania to pony up its fair share to reduce pollution that flows from the commonwealth into the bay.

The Pennsylvania legislature had finally come through, passing a bill that establishes what’s being called the Clean Streams Fund, $220 million earmarked to help reduce pollution in the state’s waterways.

Much of the money is expected to be dedicated to cleaning up the massive Susquehanna River watershed, a 27,510-square-mile region, about the size of South Carolina, that contains 8,185 miles of streams, creeks and, of course, the river. In Pennsylvania, according to the state Department of Environmental Protection, nearly one-third of the streams in the state are polluted to the point that the poor water quality harms wildlife and renders it unsuitable for human consumption.

Speaking a week after the legislature passed the measure, state Sen. Scott Martin, a Lancaster County Republican who serves as vice chairman of the Chesapeake Bay Commission, was ebullient.

“A lot of hard work went into it,” he said. “I think this is a great start. ... But we have to realize that this is a real marathon, not a sprint.”

The timing was right. For years, the state Legislature had been reluctant to dedicate state taxpayer money to cleaning up the bay – even though those dollars would go toward cleaning up the thousands of miles of compromised streams in Pennsylvania. This year, though, the state received a windfall of federal money from the American Rescue Plan Act, the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 economic relief act approved by Congress in 2021. In all, the state has allocated $700 million from the $6.15 billion it received from the federal government to environmental initiatives in the 2022-23 state budget.

Killing the Chesapeake:Report says it will cost Pa. $521 million a year to save the bay

Politically, members of the legislature advocating for more spending for clean water initiatives said, it has been a hard sell. “You know how the state is divided politically,” Martin said. Ironically, the strongest advocates for the spending were Republicans from the middle of the state whose districts would benefit from such spending. The hard sell was convincing Democrats in the state’s metropolitan areas – Philadelphia and Pittsburgh – to send dollars to the middle of the state, a region dominated by Republicans. Typically, and according to the conventional wisdom, Republicans often advocate for belt-tightening when it comes to environmental spending and Democrats who favor increased spending and regulation to reduce pollution.

“We focused on the watershed,” Martin said, “but we tried to sell it for all of Pennsylvania.”

The legislature also passed increased funding for the Growing Greener program and other stormwater management efforts. It also passed the so-called “fertilizer bill,” which regulates the use of fertilizers that contribute to adding nitrogen and phosphorus into the watershed.

Overall, the passage of the bills signifies a sea change in Pennsylvania’s commitment to clean water and to the bay. Environmental advocates described it as "historic."

Much of the money will go toward reducing pollution from agriculture, something that would benefit farmers in Lancaster and York counties. The Chesapeake Bay Foundation estimates that more than 90 percent of the state’s pollution reductions must come from reforming farming practices that prevent soil and nitrogen from flowing into tributaries in the watershed.

“Pennsylvania farmers have shown they are willing to invest their time, land and limited funds to clean and protect local rivers and streams,” said Bill Chain, the foundation’s interim director and senior agricultural program manager in Pennsylvania. The new funding, he said, “will give them added financial and technical resources to reduce polluted runoff, increase farm sustainability, and get the commonwealth back on track toward meeting its clean water commitments.”

The environmental advocacy group PennFuture described the effort “as a historical win for clean water.” However, Renee Reber, the group’s campaign manager for watershed advocacy, acknowledged that the investment goes “a long way to meeting our goals,” but warned that, “This doesn’t get the job done.”

“With that said,” Reber said, “lawmakers still acknowledge a gap remains to meet the required $324 million per year needed to fund our pollution reduction needs, and the need for recurring, sustainable funding is still there.”

Martin is aware that the need for sustainable funding is paramount. “Make no mistake,” he said, “it’s going to be a continuous effort. Hopefully, it’s a sign that Pennsylvania is moving the issue to the front burner.”

This article originally appeared on York Daily Record: PA moves water quality and saving the Chesapeake 'to the front burner'