Rescuing a Protein Factory

By Peter Stoler

New plans are under way to save a great bay from pollutants

The Chesapeake has always attracted superlatives. Captain John Smith, who first entered the bay in 1608, was so taken with the "fruitful and delightsome" place that he declared, "Heaven and earth never agreed better to frame a place for man's habitation." H.L. Mencken, Baltimore's celebrated sage, was so impressed by the bay's rich marine life that he labeled it "an immense protein factory."

Both descriptions are accurate. Stretching nearly 200 miles from its northern end at the Susquehanna flats to its southern end at the Virginia capes, only 30 miles wide at its broadest point, the Chesapeake has long been a source of almost overwhelming natural abundance. Geese, black ducks, mallard, teal and widgeon have darkened the skies over the bay and fattened themselves in its marshes. Striped bass, shad and herring spawn in its shallow bays. Oysters, clams and the succulent Atlantic blue crab provide the bay's hardy watermen with a livelihood and gourmets with seafood delights.

But this bounty and the bay itself are now threatened. Watermen have been saying for years that the Chesapeake is dying. Now others are confirming their complaint. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, after making a $28 million six-year study, concluded in 1983 that the Chesapeake is clearly an ecosystem in decline. Says Maryland Governor Harry Hughes: "Time is running out for the Chesapeake. If we do not take action to save the bay, there may be no point in taking it tomorrow; it may be too late."

President Reagan concurs. Visiting with crabbers at the bay's Tilghman Island last week, he noted the deteriorating condition of the Chesapeake and, without specifying what he or his Administration would do, acknowledged that "the time for action is now."

His concern is timely. Fish catches have been dropping dramatically. The haul of shad, which topped the 17 million-lb. mark in the late 19th century, dropped below 2.5 million Ibs. during the late '70s, and in 1980 Maryland banned all shad fishing. Striped bass are also disappearing. In 1973 fishermen sold 5 million Ibs. of stripers, or rockfish, as they are called in Maryland. Last year's harvest was under 400,000 Ibs.

The Chesapeake still produces some 50 million Ibs. of crab meat a year, more than that of all other U.S. areas combined. But oyster catches, which produced an astonishing 120 million Ibs. of meat annually in the 19th century, stabilized at about one-sixth that level some 20 years ago. In 1982-83 the tonnage dropped even further when a mysterious and fatal disease called MSX ravaged the crop.

Larry Simns, President of the Maryland Waterman's Association, says that declining catches are forcing him and his fellow fishermen out of business. As Tilghman Islander William Roulette points out, "We all must work part-time ashore." The Chesapeake fleet of skipjacks, sail-driven oyster dredges, has dropped from more than 100 boats to 30; the number of working watermen has shrunk from 7,500 in the '50s to about 5,000.

Some of the damage stems from natural causes. But most of the bay's problems can be traced to man. Between 1950 and 1980, population in the bay's watershed increased from 8.5 million to 12.7 million, and the amount of sewage dumped into the Chesapeake's tributaries and into the bay rose accordingly. Industry in the Chesapeake watershed, which extends all the way to New York's Finger Lakes, also expanded.

The growth of the bay area's population has been accompanied by the peril of pollution. The EPA found high concentrations of such heavy metals as copper, cadmium and lead in rivers flowing into the bay from Baltimore, Washington and other cities; high levels of organic compounds, including PCB's, Kepone and DDT, were detected in Pennsylvania and Virginia rivers that flow into the bay.

An even greater source of concern is the destruction of the bay's submerged aquatic grasses. This vegetation produces the oxygen essential for the survival of marine life, stabilizes the shoreline against erosion and provides food for species ranging from ducks to fish to crab larvae. In 1971 this subaquatic plant life could be found in 30% of the Chesapeake and its tributaries. Now, says the EPA study, it can be found in only 4.5% of that area.

One cause of grass loss is an increase of sediment, which blocks the light that plants need in order to carry on photosynthesis. Another problem is the bay's excess of nitrogen and phosphorus. These nutrients "fertilize" the bay and promote the proliferation of algae. When algae decompose, they rob the water of its life-giving oxygen, killing the grasses and the creatures that depend on them. There are areas of the bay--submarine deserts--where nothing at all can live.

Most of the phosphorus, biologists have found, comes from factories and municipal sewage-treatment plants. The nitrogen apparently enters the Chesapeake from farm fields and construction sites, which send fertilizers and soil into rivers and, ultimately, into the bay. Most of this nitrogen comes into the Chesapeake from the Susquehanna River. Flowing across Pennsylvania's rich farm country, the Susquehanna provides the bay with more than 40% of its fresh water and up to three-quarters of its nutrients.

In an attempt to deal with pollutants threatening the bay, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia, with federal help, are jointly trying to identify and battle the problems. The cleanup campaign will be costly. Though the President's visit raised hopes that he will sign legislation providing $40 million to improve the bay, the Federal Government has thus far set aside only a modest $10 million. Maryland, the state most affected by the bay's deterioration, has appropriated $36 million in state funds to finance antipollution efforts, but the other affected states have passed Chesapeake cleanup bills that total just a bit over $1 million.

Maryland Governor Hughes acknowledges that getting the necessary cooperation from private citizens may also prove to be difficult. Industrial firms and other property owners have traditionally resisted attempts by state or local authorities to tell them how they can use their land. Maryland's watermen have always opposed efforts to make them curb their catches, although a growing number of them now grudgingly concede that more controlled harvesting is necessary.

It is important that everyone be willing to sacrifice, since the pressures on the bay can only increase. According to a study by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the population of the bay area will rise by more than 3 million in the next 35 years. --By Peter Staler