The NH Department of Environmental Services recently released its long-awaited draft Great Bay Non-Point Source Nitrogen Study, providing a breakdown of the sources of nitrogen pollution in the estuary, and additional insights on how to improve and protect water quality.

According to the draft study, the Great Bay estuary receives, on average, a total load of 1,225 tons per year of nitrogen pollution.  Of that total load, 390 tons (32 percent) come from sewage treatment plants. The remainder – approximately 900 tons per year – comes from a variety of so-called “non-point” sources: sources of pollution that are less discrete and less concentrated than what many of us may think of as a pipe discharging pollution from a facility. The draft study looked at four major “non-point” inputs of nitrogen pollution – atmospheric deposition, chemical fertilizers, septic systems and animal waste.

The study found that atmospheric deposition accounts for roughly 280 tons of nitrogen pollution annually (23% of the nitrogen load to the estuary). While a large percent of this is from out-of-state sources, such as polluted air from the Midwest, the rest comes from New Hampshire.

We can all help, by taking actions that reduce air pollution – such as by driving less, carpooling, using public transportation, using less electricity, and purchasing power from sources other than PSNH, which continues to operate polluting coal-fired power plants like Portsmouth’s Schiller Station. CLF has joined the empowerNH campaign, which provides information about how you can switch away from PSNH’s dirty, expensive energy and purchase cheaper, cleaner power.

According to the study, chemical fertilizer is another source of nitrogen pollution, adding 30 tons of nitrogen per year, or 18% of the estuary’s total load. Lawns and agricultural areas each contribute about the same amount, while recreational fields, parks and golf courses are only responsible for a small fraction of the total. The message here is clear – agricultural operations need to implement best management practices, and we need to have smaller lawns and use less fertilizer. Learn how you can have a healthy lawn and protect the environment.

Did you also know that more than half of the nitrogen load to the Great Bay estuary comes from human waste?

Human waste from septic systems accounts for 240 tons per year of nitrogen pollution. Add that to the 390 tons per year from sewage treatment plants – the single largest source of nitrogen pollution (and a source that can be easily controlled through sewage treatment upgrades) – and human waste accounts for a whopping 630 tons per year, meaning over half of the total nitrogen load to the estuary comes from human waste.

Animal waste accounts for the remaining 110 tons per year of nitrogen pollution in the estuary, with livestock responsible for most of this total. The rest is from pet waste. While pet waste is not a big part of the problem, reducing the water quality impacts of our pets is something all pet owners can do. Learn about environmentally friendly ways to care for your pet.

According to the study, much of the nitrogen from these non-point sources reaches the estuary through stormwater runoff. This means that in addition to reducing pollution from sewage treatment plants, we have to tackle the difficult challenge of stormwater pollution. Looking forward, it will be essential for communities to adopt “green infrastructure” approaches that reduce runoff, and to promote more compact development patterns as opposed to land-consuming sprawl. Incredibly, as a result of sprawl, impervious surfaces (roads, parking lots and rooftops) in New Hampshire’s coastal watershed increased 120 percent since 1990!

The study also modeled nitrogen loads for individual subwatersheds and towns to identify “hot spots.” These results should be useful in prioritizing efforts to reduce non-point sources of nitrogen and will complement a study being completed by the UNH Water Resources Center to pinpoint many of these hot spots.

Did you find this information useful, interesting, or believe more work needs to be done? Then you can be involved. The Department of Environmental Services is accepting public comments on the draft report until August 16, 2013.

For more information about the Great Bay-Piscataqua Waterkeeper and my work to protect the Great Bay estuary, visit: http://www.clf.org/great-bay-waterkeeper/. You can also follow me on Facebook and Twitter.

Residents of Newmarket, New Hampshire went to the polls on Tuesday and sent a powerful message: that clean water is essential, and that we need to make needed investments to support it.

Up for vote yesterday was a warrant article to fund the $14 million construction of a major upgrade to the town’s sewage treatment plant. The result? More than 80 percent of voters approved the measure, making Newmarket a leading community in the efforts to improve the health of the Great Bay estuary.

Last December, Newmarket’s City Council voted unanimously to become the first New Hampshire Seacoast community to accept stringent reductions in nitrogen pollution from a sewage treatment plant. It has long been recognized that nitrogen from sewage treatment plants is a major, controllable source of the pollution that’s causing the decline of the Great Bay estuary.

Now, thanks to the wisdom of its voters, Newmarket can begin the upgrade of its existing sewage treatment plant – a facility in desperate need of an overhaul. First built in 1965 and last updated in 1985, it has become increasingly difficult – and costly – to maintain the facility. Under the terms of Newmarket’s agreement with EPA, the town now has five years to complete the project. Additional improvements may be required in later years. The town must also develop a comprehensive plan to reduce the impacts from polluted stormwater.

In accepting their final permit and working with EPA – rather than taking the path of endless, costly litigation currently being pursued by Portsmouth, Dover and Rochester – Newmarket town officials chose to be an important part of the solution for the Great Bay estuary. Now, Newmarket voters have taken the next critical step, confirming the town’s willingness to lead in solving our water pollution problems.

Newmarket’s positive vote sends a powerful signal that the people of the Seacoast care about protecting the health of our waters. Municipal officials in Portsmouth, Dover and Rochester need to hear this message, and need to end their ongoing tactics designed to delay needed protections for our estuary – delays that the Great Bay estuary simply can’t afford.

Newmarket voters are to be thanked and congratulated for taking this important, much needed step toward protecting the Lamprey River, Great Bay, and the estuary as a whole, now and for future generations.

For more information about the Great Bay-Piscataqua Waterkeeper and my work to protect the Great Bay estuary, visit: http://www.clf.org/great-bay-waterkeeper/. You can also follow me on Facebook and Twitter.

Like many other communities in the Seacoast, Newmarket is faced with an aging and outdated sewage treatment plant. As the health of the Great Bay estuary continues to decline, the town is committed to being part of the solution.

Fortunately, Newmarket – along with Exeter – has decided the best way to move forward is to work with EPA and recently became the first community in the estuary to accept stringent nitrogen limits. By voting to accept its permit, the town has taken a significant first step towards addressing the issue of nitrogen pollution – the primary cause of the decline in eelgrass biomass.

The town is to be commended for taking this action. The current facility exceeds its total suspended solids and biochemical oxygen demand monthly average limits during the winter months. The plant has not had a major upgrade since 1985 making it more costly to maintain. A new and updated facility will result in improved water quality in the Lamprey River and Great Bay.

In order to educate residents on why a new plant is needed, the town’s Conservation Commission held a public forum on the “Health of the Great Bay Estuary.” As Waterkeeper, I had the privilege of facilitating the discussion on the town’s plans for a new treatment plant and why the upgrade must be done now.  There were several presentations on the impacts of pollution on the estuary which have caused dramatic habitat changes including a decrease in fish populations. The fact that not all nitrogen is created equal was also discussed.

Sewage treatment plants are a major source of dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) – the most reactive form of nitrogen. While sewage treatment plants are responsible for thirty-two percent of the total nitrogen load to the estuary, they contribute fifty-two percent of the dissolved inorganic nitrogen. According to the Piscataqua Region Estuaries Partnership (PREP) State of Our Estuaries 2013 report, there has been a 68% average increase for DIN between 1974 and 2011. You can read PREP’s entire 2013 report here.

The Forum’s message was clear – if we want to clean up the estuary we need to address point and non-point sources of pollution as well as improving the habitat to allow key species like eelgrass and oysters to thrive. I urge Newmarket votes to approve the warrant article for a new treatment plant on March 12.

For more information about the Great Bay-Piscataqua Waterkeeper and my work to protect the Great Bay estuary, visit: http://www.clf.org/great-bay-waterkeeper/. You can also follow me on Facebook and Twitter.

In a move that will further delay progress cleaning up the Great Bay estuary, the Cities of Rochester and Dover, NH, have appealed a critical permit recently issued by the EPA to address the mounting problem of nitrogen pollution in the Great Bay estuary.

Whose permit did they appeal? Incredibly, Rochester and Dover are expending resources not to appeal a permit that affects their sewage treatment plants. Rather, in the height of arrogance, Dover and Rochester are appealing a permit granted by EPA to the Town of Newmarket, for Newmarket’s sewage treatment plant. Apparently, Rochester and Dover have decided that when it comes to the health of the Lamprey River in Newmarket, and Great Bay, they know best.

In a press release issued by the Town of Newmarket on December 10, the Town stated that “it is in the best interest of our community to work with the EPA to protect Great Bay instead of entering into a lengthy and costly legal process.” The Town has recognized this is not something that can be put off and hopes to move quickly to build a new, much-needed sewage treatment plant.

Unfortunately, Newmarket’s desire to constructively move forward with solving the problem of nitrogen pollution in the Lamprey River and Great Bay means nothing to Dover and Rochester. Filing this appeal could delay final permitting of the Newmarket sewage treatment plant for years, jeopardizing the health of the estuary. Click here to read more about Newmarket’s reaction to this unfortunate and unexpected legal maneuver by Dover and Rochester.

It is outrageous that Dover and Rochester – purportedly acting as the Great Bay Municipal Coalition, of which Newmarket is a part – would bring a legal action challenging another town’s permit. And if interfering in the affairs of Newmarket is not enough, Dover and Rochester – along with the City of Portsmouth – also recently filed a lawsuit against EPA challenging the regulatory process in the estuary (after having a similar lawsuit against the NH Department of Environmental Services thrown out by the Merrimack County Superior Court).

How much money do these communities plan to spend in their seemingly endless effort to delay cleaning up the estuary? In September, they had spent more than $750,000. Of course, the tab only continues to grow. Do the residents of Dover and Rochester really want their valuable city resources being used to prevent other communities from taking constructive action to protect their local waters and Great Bay?

If you are as outraged as I am by this latest development, please contact me at pwellenberger@clf.org to learn how you can help bring real progress to protecting Great Bay – now, and for future generations.  Enough meddling – we need to get to work and clean up the estuary.

For more information about the Great Bay-Piscataqua Waterkeeper and my work to protect the Great Bay estuary, visit: http://www.clf.org/great-bay-waterkeeper/. You can also follow me on Facebook and on Twitter.