TESTIMONY BEFORE
SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION AND FORESTRY
THURSDAY, MARCH 19, 1998 -- 9:00 A.M.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman for inviting me to talk with you and members of the Committee today about Maryland's recent experience with toxic Pfiesteria, the importance of water quality and the pressing need for NATIONAL agricultural standards regarding animal waste pollution.
As I drove in to the city this morning, I noticed several cars with Maryland license plates with the words "Treasure the Chesapeake" emblazoned on them. A not so subtle reminder that while I am here today as the Governor of Maryland, and as a guardian of the Chesapeake Bay, I am also here as an avid fisherman, as someone who loves seafood, and like millions of Marylanders, indeed, like millions of Americans, I am here today as someone who sees the Chesapeake Bay as a true national treasure.
All across Maryland, this region and this nation, there are thousands of families like mine for whom our waterways are places to work, to live, and to play. While other states have faced similar challenges with toxic Pfiesteria-like organisms, Maryland's experience is unique in two respects. First, Maryland is Maryland because of the Chesapeake Bay. Indeed, while the Bay literally divides our State geographically, it is also a powerful unifying force in the lives of many Marylanders. Second, Maryland was the first state in the nation to link toxic outbreaks of Pfiesteria to concerns about public health.
Last Summer, Maryland faced an unprecedented challenge to the health and vitality of our waterways–and the health of our citizens. The Pocomoke River, a creek of the Manokin River watershed and part of the Chicamacomico River, experienced outbreaks of toxic Pfiesteria. The reports of large fish kills and the images of small fish disfigured by sores were horrific. Even worse were the reports that several of my fellow Marylanders experienced health problems after prolonged exposure to toxic Pfiesteria. Our experience last Summer sharply reminded us of the link between our land and our water and the effect of water quality on our health and livelihoods. Clearly, what we put on the land ultimately ends up in the water.
We are fortunate in Maryland that when we have such a challenge, it does not matter if you live on the Pocomoke or on the Potomac, on the Eastern Shore or the Western Shore, or whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, we are all Marylanders first. Last year, in response to the toxic Pfiesteria crisis, we took bold steps. We quickly closed parts of several waterways to protect the health of our citizens. We worked closely with our outstanding Congressional delegation to secure a Federal research appropriation to study toxic Pfiesteria. And I thank Senators Sarbanes and Mikulski and Congressmen Hoyer and Gilchrest for their rapid action in securing this much needed federal support.
We also recognized early on that--in all likelihood--toxic Pfiesteria will return this Summer. That has been the experience in other states and it is the opinion of medical and environmental experts. Therefore, we worked quickly and aggressively to develop a fair and comprehensive program to combat toxic Pfiesteria long-term. Maryland's plan is based on the best available science. It is based on our knowledge that excessive nutrients are harmful to the Bay and its tributaries. And, it is based on the knowledge that if we do not change our behavior, outbreaks of toxic Pfiesteria will continue year after year after year.
I stress from the outset that our plan does not blame farmers for the outbreaks of toxic Pfiesteria. Nor does it in any way make farmers entirely responsible for solving the problem. Our approach is intended to be a true partnership, with the state making significant investments and working with farmers to alter those behaviors that we know have contributed to the degradation of our water quality.
While the details of our original proposal are currently being resolved in a conference committee, I briefly will touch on the key elements that will certainly be included in whatever version of our plan is ultimately approved.
First, the plan will feature mandatory nutrient-management levels that limit the amount of nutrient runoff on our farms--both phosphorus and nitrogen. We currently have in Maryland an outstanding program of voluntary nutrient management. I am extremely proud of the many farming families who go the extra mile to protect our environment with these voluntary programs. Unfortunately, our experience last year and our expectations for this year indicate the voluntary programs simply do not have a wide enough impact. A mandatory program with a firm implementation date is the only approach that will ensure success.
The second feature of our program directs over $15 million this year alone to assist farmers and to address other nutrient problems. We realize that we must work closely with our farmers and supply much-needed financial and technical support so that our goals will be meet.
Finally, as I mentioned, we are targeting other sources of nutrients, such as sewage treatment plants and the use of commercial fertilizers. As we move forward with this plan, we will have made significant strides towards improving water quality and stopping outbreaks of toxic Pfiesteria.
Last Fall I had the opportunity to testify before the House Government Reform & Oversight Subcommittee on Human Resources. I pointed out last time that by some measures Pfiesteria has been around anywhere from 10 million to 400 million years. Of course, my primary question at the time was why did something that had been around for so many millions of years have to go toxic in the middle of my Administration! Seriously, we need to conduct the research as to why Pfiesteria went toxic. I appreciate Congress stepping up and providing funds for additional research. But the fact is, the science is clear: Nutrient run-off is causing problems with water quality. And water quality is what this is really all about.
I have focused on Maryland's experience with toxic Pfiesteria, but other states are experiencing similar problems. At a recent meeting of the National Governors Association I spoke with Governor Voinovich about water quality problems in the Great Lakes; recently we have seen news of fish kills in Florida; Pfiesteria-like organisms have been found in Virginia's Rappahannock River; North Carolina has struggled with this problem for over seven years; and Delaware experienced a massive fish kill in 1987 that may have been Pfiesteria-related. The fact is, large- number fish kills have increased from about 10 per year to close to 50 per year across the country over the past 20 years. We must address the issue of Water Quality on a larger scale.
Water quality, and the impact of toxic Pfiesteria on animal life and human life, ARE problems in Maryland...but they are NOT "Maryland problems". Maryland--and Maryland's waterways--do not exist in a vacuum. The fact is, over half the water of the Chesapeake Bay flows from the Susquehanna River starting in New York State, through Pennsylvania, and into the Bay. A journey of over 450 miles. Agricultural practices in New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Delaware, and Virginia ALL impact water quality in Maryland and the Chesapeake Bay.
Clearly, water quality and Pfiesteria know no geographic boundaries. That is why one of our first steps last summer was to assemble my fellow governors from throughout the region. We were able to enter into a partnership with Governor Carper of Delaware; Then-Governor Allen of Virginia; Governor Underwood of West Virginia; Governor Hunt of North Carolina; and Governor Ridge of Pennsylvania. We pledged to pool our talents and resources and work together to overcome this challenge.
Unfortunately, the ability of some multi-State corporations to locate anywhere in the country and, in some cases, anywhere in the world, can hinder an individual state's ability to realize progress in this area. This underscores the fact that the issue of clean water cannot be addressed State-by-State, or region-by- region. I strongly support the Administration's National Clean Water effort that was announced in Baltimore in February. We now know we must have a strong, clear, national standard for managing animal waste and national standards for achieving and measuring water quality. Our water does not recognize State boundaries. Toxic Pfiesteria does not recognize State boundaries. We are all in this together.
In Maryland, we chose to address animal waste and nutrient management planning because we have been entrusted with one of the most precious natural resources in the world--the Chesapeake Bay. We need to do our part to keep the Bay and its tributaries clean and safe for future generations. We will continue to reach out to our surrounding states to seek their help in this effort. But the fact is, no mater what steps Maryland--or ANY individual State--takes, unless these internal steps are complemented by real and meaningful national regulations, only incomplete solutions to the problem will ever be achieved
In closing, I am proud of the leadership role Maryland has taken in addressing this issue. On behalf of the 5 million citizens of Maryland, and the countless millions of people across the country and across the world who enjoy the beauty, the recreational opportunities, and the bounty of Maryland Chesapeake Bay, I express my appreciation of the support we have received from Congress. I am also encouraged by the continued interest that the issue of clean water and public health continues to receive. The fact is, it is the duty of the Federal Government to act when a problem is national in scope and when fair and effective measures can be implemented through the regulatory process. The management of animal waste to protect water quality is one area where Federal action is clearly needed. Thank you.