DEQ Water Quality report: James still impaired in Richmond

The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality released the final version of the 2010 Water Quality Report, the so-called “dirty waters list” of Virginia streams, rivers, lakes, and bays found to be polluted. According to a release from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, there are a few things to keep in mind:

CBF: Lawn fertilizer bill will reduce bay pollution, save money

Release from Chesapeake Bay Foundation:

Bipartisan legislation that will bar the Virginia sale of fertilizer containing phosphorus for use on established lawns has passed the House of Delegates and the Senate of Virginia and is headed to the governor’s desk for his signature.

State of the Bay Report: Time for action, stewardship is now

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation released the 2010 State of the Bay Report. President William C. Baker had a good quote that can be applied to most anything in life: ”Nothing could be more short-sighted than apathy, lax enforcement, or fear mongering. The time for action and stewardship is now.” The James River isn’t noted prominently in this report, but it is a huge factor in the health of our state and the Chesapeake Bay.

There is good news and bad. The Chesapeake Bay is showing encouraging signs of rebounding but is still in critical condition as a result of pollution. The numeric index of the Bay’s health jumped three points from 2008 to 2010, with eight of 13 indicators rising. The indicator for the health of the blue crab population spiked 15 points, as the Bay’s population increased significantly last year. Also, underwater grasses showed steady progress for the fourth year in a row. But the overall health index of the Bay is 31 out of 100, which means it is still a system dangerously out of balance.

RIVER RAVE: Enjoying a cleaner James River?

Do we take for granted these days how clean the James River is as it passes through Richmond, especially considering that it used to be an extension of the sewer system whenever it rained?  That was a long time ago, but back then people didn’t swim in the river. Some environmental pioneers, like Newton Ancarrow, did their best to wake up Richmond to the neglected, polluted river.

According to data from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, the water quality for the James River as it flows through the city rates well in tests for E. coli bacteria (except when the river levels are high due to heavy rains) at five key swimming areas: Pony Pasture, 42nd Street (Main Area), North Bank (Texas Beach), Belle Isle (Hollywood Rapid) and Tredegar Beach (Brown’s Island).

A few long-time James River photographers I’ve spoken with have lamented that they didn’t take photos of the bad things they saw back when the river was so polluted. Those photos could stand as a testament to how far the health of the James has progressed.

For many Richmonders, the James River is playground. Do you remember a time when the James was dirty and unsuitable for recreation? Do we take that for granted now? How important to you is it that the James is clean? How much time and effort do you put toward its upkeep?

Thompson: State might have to get tough to protect James

The Richmond Times-Dispatch’s outdoors writer, Andy Thompson, produced a column Friday declaring Virginia might have to get tough to protect James. It included discussion of recent commentary from Bill Street, executive director of the James River Association, and W. Tayloe Murphy Jr., of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, which James River News Hub posted previously.  Here is tidbit from Thompson:

For at least a quarter century, Virginia and other bay states have played chicken with the federal government – and won. They’ve called the feds’ bluff, betting they wouldn’t use the authority granted by the Clean Water Act of 1972 to enforce cleanup plans the states paid little more than lip service to.

Well, now the feds seem serious, threatening states’ permit-issuing capacity for things such as wastewater treatment plants, concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and residential developments.

“Everyone acknowledges it’s not the best way to accomplish the goals [of cleaning up the bay],” said Bill Street. “But if [the EPA is] left with no choice, then they are compelled by the Clean Water Act to do that.”