On Thursday, February 9, the EPA is holding a public hearing on a new Clean Water Act discharge permit for the City of Dover’s sewage treatment plant. The hearing involves a decision that will be critical to the health of the Great Bay estuary. We urge all who care about the future health of the estuary to attend. The hearing takes place at 7:00 pm in the McConnell Center located at 61 Locust Street (Room 306).

The proposed permit contains important new wastewater discharge limits needed to control the single greatest threat to the Great Bay estuary: water pollution caused by excess nitrogen. You can learn more about problems associated with nitrogen pollution and eelgrass loss, and the need to reduce pollution from sewage treatment plants, at our Great Bay-Piscataqua Waterkeeper website.

CLF strongly supports the draft permit’s important provisions addressing nitrogen pollution, and we commend EPA for taking this essential step toward restoring the estuary’s health. As the Great Bay-Piscataqua Waterkeeper, I encourage you to attend the Dover public hearing and voice your support for these needed protections.

The Great Bay estuary is a natural treasure that is intractably linked to the local economy and culture of the Seacoast region. Please join me in the effort to save this critical resource. If you are unable to attend the public hearing, please contact me so I can share with you other opportunities to protect the estuary.

Thank you for standing up for the future health and protection of the Great Bay estuary!

For additional information about the Waterkeeper, visit us on our website or Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Robin Just is a volunteer for CLF with an educational and professional background in biology and water quality issues. This blog was originally published on TalkingFish.org.

When we talk about fish, it’s good to remember that they not only come from somewhere but that the somewhere makes the fish. Habitat is essential; without it even many migratory fish won’t have a place to call home.

An eelgrass bed beneath the waters of New Hampshire's Great Bay (Photo credit: Ben Kimball, courtesy of NH Division of Forests and Lands).

Many North Atlantic fish spend an important part of their life cycles in coastal eelgrass habitat, and eelgrass is declining. Eelgrass is a native submerged aquatic plant found in shallow waters from Nova Scotia to North Carolina’s Outer Banks. In the northern areas this hearty plant spends part of each year under sea ice. It is not a true grass, but a flowering plant that evolved from terrestrial flora. With thin, streamlined leaves, and an extensive root system, it is uniquely adapted to thrive in ocean tides and swell. What it isn’t adapted to deal with is nutrient pollution, dredging, and other anthropogenic stressors that have our productive eelgrass meadow areas on the decline.

Why does this matter to fish? Eelgrass is one of the most valuable habitats in the northeast. For example, in the early 1930s a “wasting disease” decimated 90% of the Atlantic eelgrass communities. This decline took a heavy toll on, among other things, bay scallops. Bay scallops are a commercially important shellfish that range from Cape Cod to Florida, and are very dependent on seagrass meadows. Not only do they attach to living eelgrass leaves after their larval stage, but they consume decaying leaves for a significant portion of their diet. Bay scallops declined dramatically throughout their range, coincident with the wasting disease, and populations didn’t begin to recover until the mid-1940s. Some populations, such as those in the Chesapeake Bay, have never come back.  Lobsters, clams, and other invertebrates also declined.

Loss of eelgrass habitat has an effect on other commercial fishery species as well. Some of these animals, such as cod, winter flounder, and lobster use eelgrass meadows as a refuge in their early life stages. The eelgrass provides places to stay hidden, feeding opportunities, and shelter from wave energy. Some species, such as striped bass, bluefish, tautog, and fluke will use eelgrass habitat as adults, as a place to hunt and forage.

A tautog in an eelgrass bed (Photo credit: MA Divison of Marine Fisheries).

In addition to providing a place to eat and live, eelgrass is part of the foundation of our marine food web. Eelgrass is a primary producer – turning aquatic carbon dioxide into food and energy through photosynthesis; it is then eaten by many animals that are then consumed by our commercially important species. In short: eelgrass matters a lot to New England fishery resources, and its decline is not good news.

The impact of the loss of eelgrass on these fisheries is hard to tease out from the many drivers of the decline in fish populations, including fishing pressure, habitat destruction, nutrient pollution, climate change, and other stressors. There has been almost no research done to numerically link the decline in eelgrass with population-level changes in commercial fisheries species. However, an 11-year study in Buzzards and Waquoit Bays found that loss of eelgrass was accompanied by significant declines in fish biomass, species richness, and other measures of community integrity. Worryingly, a recent investigation of New Hampshire eelgrass populations found they are declining by about 9% a year, and eelgrass mapping efforts in Massachusetts show significant declines as well. This is an issue the Conservation Law Foundation’s new Great Bay-Piscatqua Waterkeeper will be addressing.

While the link has yet to be fully characterized between commercial fish populations and healthy eelgrass, it is vital that recovering species have functioning near-shore ecosystems to support their reproduction and growth.

Why is eelgrass declining? The decline is worldwide. Our local populations are suffering from a combination of coastal development and nutrient pollution, dredging activities, over-grazing by Canada geese, and climate change. Here’s a brief description of each of those stressors:

• Eelgrass is extremely sensitive to light levels. Urban build-up and construction activities in our coastal areas put sediment in the water, which decreases water clarity, and that takes a toll on eelgrass populations . Nutrient pollution from wastewater, stormwater, and other human activities can promote blooms of algae that block light to these photosensitive plants and prevent them from growing.
•  Dredging activities uproot eelgrass and can completely decimate an eelgrass meadow. It can take ten years or more for eelgrass to recover from this kind of stress.
• Grazing pressure from Canada geese is on the rise as the warmer winters encourage more of them to stay local instead of heading south. More geese means competition for food, and the geese increasingly turn to eelgrass to get them through the winters.
• Climate change: as ocean temperatures rise, native plants feel the heat. There is evidence that northern populations of eelgrass will not be able to adapt to warmer waters as easily as the southern populations might.

Efforts to restore eelgrass are underway around New England, but it’s not a simple process. Areas that once supported thriving eelgrass meadows can be re-planted, but unless the factors involved in eelgrass decline are addressed, the efforts will probably fail. For example, if construction activities degrade nearby water quality, leading to eelgrass loss, and then the water quality recovers, restoration is possible. But if the water is still dirty, it’s not going to help, and the habitat is lost.

Waiting until we know exactly how eelgrass ecosystems and commercial fish populations are linked before we address eelgrass decline is a dangerous path to follow. Since we know for sure that many of our economically important species utilize this habitat, it makes sense to try and protect it. We need good science about the utilization of eelgrass habitat, and we need effective restoration efforts that address water quality and other physical stressors. This will give our recovering fish populations every opportunity to grow and thrive.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Northeast Region @ flickr. Creative Commons.

There could not be a more perfect time for a Great Bay-Piscataqua Waterkeeper. Working with CLF, I view one of my key roles as rallying citizens and communities around one purpose, cleaning up the estuary. Everyone living here has an impact on the estuary in one way or another.  It is our responsibility to limit that impact and become better stewards of our environment. Whether you live near the Squamscott River in Newfields or Stratham, or near Spinney Creek on the Maine side, we all need be more involved in the decisions that will determine the future of this wonderful natural resource.

Last Friday, I attended a meeting that was designed to foster improved communication among those who care about the future of the estuary. Convened by the Piscataqua Region Estuaries Partnership, the meeting was part of an ongoing series of discussions known as the Great Bay Dialogue.  There are many individuals, groups and town officials concerned about the future health of the estuary, but a lack of coordination has always derailed past attempts to act as a single voice.

Twenty plus people attended this meeting representing state agencies, local government, land trusts and a mix of non-profits. In a large group, there are always differences on how to move forward. As Manager of the Great Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve for twenty-two years, I have participated in countless meetings on the management and protection of New Hampshire’s most important coastal ecosystem. So why was this one any different?

Everyone there made a commitment to work towards a cleaner and healthier estuary for one simple reason – the risk is too high if we wait any longer to act. The estuary is nearing a tipping point and once crossed, we may never be able to recover the ecosystem. The goal is to come up with solutions now that, in the long run, will cost far less than if we delay and allow the estuary to crash.

Achieving this goal will not be easy, but the more stakeholders we have involved, the greater chance of success. Clean water improves our quality of life and helps to promote a sustainable economy. From big fixes to small ones, we all have a role to play.

As Reserve manager, I helped to create the Great Bay Resource Protection Partnership. The group, to date, has invested over 62 million dollars in federal and private funds to protect and conserve land throughout the Great Bay region. Now is the time to protect that investment by increasing our efforts to improve water quality in the estuary.

Join the dialogue and help me in the fight to save the estuary from reaching that tipping point.  I can be reached at 603.498.3545 or pwellenberger@clf.org.

Me on a recent beautiful day on the Great Bay estuary.

I’m thrilled to be launching an important and much needed effort to restore and protect the health of our treasured Great Bay estuary: CLF’s new Great Bay-Piscataqua Waterkeeper program.

As the Great Bay-Piscataqua Waterkeeper, I’ll be devoting all my time and effort to protecting this remarkable water resource – a resource that is threatened by pollution and deserves all the attention it can get. It’s a place I’ve come to know well through 20 years of managing the Great Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, and by living in nearby Newmarket. The threats to the Bay have never been clearer, the opportunity to fix them never greater.

The objective of the Great Bay-Piscataqua Waterkeeper program is to work for and protect the health of the waters making up the Great Bay estuary – our major bays (Great Bay and Little Bay), our tidal rivers (the Piscataqua, Salmon Falls, Cocheco, Bellamy, Oyster, Lamprey, Squamscott and Winnicut Rivers), and our wonderful harbors and creeks (Portsmouth and Little Harbor; Spinney, Spruce and Sagamore Creeks). Each of these water bodies, on their own, is an important natural resource. Together, they comprise a remarkable and rich ecosystem that is under threat..

Population growth, sprawl, and outdated water infrastructure are all contributing to the decline of the Great Bay estuary. Pollution levels have increased, leading to the loss of critical habitat within the estuary. Reversing these trends will require a multi-pronged approach including: the need to invest in improved  infrastructure, such as sewage treatment plants; innovative approaches to reducing existing stormwater pollution; and better planning to prevent future sprawl development and the water pollution it causes.

My work as the Great Bay-Piscataqua Waterkeeper will include:

• advocating for needed policies and compliance with environmental laws such as the Clean Water Act,
• working with scientists and the many stakeholders involved in efforts related to the Great Bay estuary, and
• keeping a watchful eye on waters within the estuary.

Most importantly, I look forward to building a much stronger public voice for the estuary. Just as there are many people and organizations that care about the health and future of the Great Bay estuary, there are many more people who will care, and lend their voices to protecting this amazing water resource, once they learn more about the threats it’s facing. It’s my goal to grow the chorus of concerned citizens about our Great Bay.

I first learned about Great Bay 40 years ago as an undergraduate at the University of New Hampshire. I quickly fell in love with its beauty and richness and worked with others to reject the proposal by Aristotle Onassis to build the world’s largest oil refinery on the shores of Great Bay. These efforts led to the creation of the Great Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve – a Reserve I had the privilege to manage for more than 20 years, from its inception in 1990 to 2011.They were rich, wonderful years that provided me the opportunity to work with a wide diversity of dedicated individuals committed to saving this very special place.

Having worked on Great Bay matters for more than two decades, I am deeply concerned about the declining health of the estuary. Just as its threats are many, so too are multiple solutions are needed. We’re all in this together; only through greater public action can we protect the valuable ecological, recreational and cultural benefits of this remarkable resource. It’s a major challenge, but it’s one I welcome working on with you.

Please contact me with questions or concerns about the Great Bay estuary (603.498.3545, or pwellenberger@clf.org), and stay informed about my work by visiting www.clf.org/great-bay-waterkeeper.

Credit: Cynthia Irwin

Yesterday, the Environmental Protection Agency took an important step in putting New Hampshire’s Great Bay estuary on the path to recovery.  As a direct result of CLF’s advocacy, EPA issued a draft Clean Water Act discharge permit for the Exeter sewage treatment plant requiring — for the first time — nitrogen pollution limits.

Exeter’s facility — one of the largest sewage treatment plants in New Hampshire’s Seacoast — discharges directly into the Squamscott River, which flows downstream into Great Bay.  As EPA’s fact sheet for the draft permit explains, EPA began the re-permitting process for the Exeter plant in 2007.  Noting significant pollution problems in the Squamscott River and Great Bay, CLF objected to the 2007 draft permit for its failure to regulate nitrogen.  Based on those concerns, as well as further data showing the estuary’s decline – including the loss of essential seagrass habitat — EPA’s draft permit now proposes much-needed discharge limits to control nitrogen pollution from the Exeter sewage treatment plant.

Finally controlling nitrogen pollution from this significant discharge will be essential to protecting the health of the Squamscott River, which has experienced excessive levels of chlorophyll-a, depressed levels of oxygen, and the loss of important eelgrass habitat.   It also will help tackle nitrogen pollution problems in Great Bay.  But as EPA and the Department of Environmental Services know, reducing pollution from stormwater and other sewage treatment plants will be critical for the health of the Great Bay estuary.  Of the 18 sewage treatment plants discharging into the estuary, not one has a nitrogen pollution limit.  Exeter’s will be the first, and it’s an important step in the right direction.

EPA’s draft permit will be finalized after a public comment period which expires July 22.  A public hearing on the draft permit is scheduled for June 9 (6:30 p.m. at Exeter Town Hall).  You can help secure needed protections for the Squamscott River and Great Bay by weighing in!