Home > Uncategorized > Rutgers Scientific Research Conclusively Documents Ecological Decline Of Barnegat Bay

Rutgers Scientific Research Conclusively Documents Ecological Decline Of Barnegat Bay

Christie DEP Blocking Release of Embarrassing Report for Political Reasons

DEP Manufactures Doubt To Prevent Publication of Damning Science

[Update: 7/18/14 – Killer Editorial:  State Apathy Killing Barnegat Bay

What should happen now is that the state declare Barnegat Bay an “impaired” waterway under the Clean Water Act, which would force DEP to create a strict action plan to reduce pollution into the bay. That’s what an activist group of former government environmental workers is calling for, and there appears to be little responsible choice now. Otherwise, the state might as well pull the plug and let the bay die.

Taking such aggressive cleanup action, however, means some meaningful — and potentially costly — regulatory restraints on coastal development, and Christie undoubtedly wants no part of that.

Update: 7/16/14 – read Kirk Moore’s superb Asbury Park Press story: NJ Must Act On Bay Report, Watchdog Group Says

“This is amazing that DEP won’t release the study when it’s been in a peer-reviewed journal,” Bill Wolfe of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility said Tuesday about highlighted portions of the Rutgers report.

The findings show the bay “may be spiraling to a point of ecological no return,” said Wolfe, a former DEP analyst who obtained the report and related documents through a Freedom of Information Act request to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which provided funding for the $480,000 project.

[Update below – explanation of how DEP is blocking release]

A Rutgers research Report, completed over a year ago, comprehensively documents the ecological decline of Barnegat Bay.

The Report proves, beyond any doubt, that the Bay is “impaired” and it recommends that a “Total Maximum Daily Load” (TMDL), required under the Clean Water Act, be implemented as the primary means of reducing  current pollution, preventing future pollution, and restoring the health of the Bay.

But the Christie DEP is blocking the release of this research Report in order to avoid compliance with the Clean Water Act’s TMDL requirements and to prevent exposure of the failure of Gov. Christie’s Management Plan and serious flaws in DEP water quality standards, monitoring, and assessment programs, which fail to show the true declining health of the Bay.

Documents we obtained via FOIA of US EPA reveal a concerted effort by DEP to “manufacture doubt” – a fraudulent tactic pioneered by the tobacco industry – and undermine the credibility and scientific conclusions of the Rutgers research.

The Report also ties the Bay health to nutrient pollution caused by over-development and thus would lead to enforceable regulatory restrictions on future land use in the watershed, as is therefore strongly opposed by local builders and economic development interests.

Read the documents and get the full story, from our friends at PEER:

banner

For Immediate Release:  Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Contact:  Bill Wolfe (609) 397-4861; Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337 

Study Documenting Barnegat Bay Decline Kept in Limbo

Land Use Driving Nutrient Loading; Pollution Diet Needed to Avert Tipping Point   

Trenton — The first quantitative biotic index for Barnegat Bay finds the estuary in steep decline and calls for major changes in how it is managed, according to text posted today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).  The comprehensive study by Rutgers University researchers has been kept from publication by the Christie administration which claims Barnegat Bay is a success story.

The massive study bears the unwieldy title “Assessment of Nutrient Loading and Eutrophication in Barnegat Bay-Little Egg Harbor, New Jersey in Support of Nutrient Management Planning” and is authored by Rutgers researchers Michael Kennish, Benjamin Fertig and Richard Lathrop.  It finds Barnegat Bay to be in “significant ecological decline” and in a “highly eutrophic” condition.  The “poorly flushed” estuary does not easily rid itself of pollutants.  The net result is an increase in brown tides (harmful algal blooms), loss of eelgrass beds, shrinking abundance of clams and loss of marine habitat.

The study concludes that declines in water quality are “strongly related to land use” and finds the highest levels of nutrient loads connected to developed areas, as opposed to forested tracts.  As development spreads it spurs “cascading changes” that push the Bay toward an as yet undetermined “tipping point.”

“This study conclusively documents that Barnegat Bay is in deep trouble and may be spiraling to a point of ecological no return,” stated New Jersey PEER Director Bill Wolfe, who obtained the study through a Freedom of Information Act request from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  “The science is inescapable that our land use practices directly affect the health of the Bay.”

Governor Chris Christie had vetoed legislation requiring adoption of a pollution diet in the form of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for Barnegat Bay.  Instead, Christie signed a largely cosmetic bill on lawn fertilizer controls.  By contrast, the Rutgers study recommends a much stronger prescription:

  • The study says adoption of a TMDL containing a “strict limit on nutrient and phosphorus loads” is “a necessary element” for recovery of the Bay;
  • It calls for stronger storm-water controls, open space preservation, soil restoration and other measures to prevent pollutants from reaching the Bay; and
  • Underlines that a TMDL and better land management are not an either/or proposition but that achieving both is “critical” to Bay recovery.

“This study should be guiding state policy on Barnegat Bay rather than gathering dust on a shelf,” added Wolfe who has been advocating a TMDL for the ailing estuary.  “The Christie people do not want this study to see the light of day because it shows that their so-called recovery package for Barnegat Bay is itself just a different type of ‘nutrient load.’”

###

See the study’s “Key Findings’

Look at its recommendations

 View the Executive Summary

Revisit bogus Christie attempt to declare the Bay unimpaired

  

New Jersey PEER is a state chapter of a national alliance of state and federal agency resource professionals working to ensure environmental ethics and government accountability

[Update: I just got a good question from a reader asking how DEP is blocking release of this study.

I should have made that more clear.

The study is EPA funded, but partially funded by the DEP. For administrative reasons, EPA decided to contract the management of the research to a private professional water resource group in New England.

DEP serves on the study’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). The other TAC members are EPA and Barnegat Bay Partnership (BBP). The BBP is funded by EPA and DEP, so they know which way the wind blows, and have raised similar objections to the study, including some criticisms that lack scientific merit.

The TAC signed off on the scope of work and QA/QC plans for the study, met regular for over 2 years with Rutgers to review data and progress, and must sign off on the final report before it is released. Despite all this, late in the process the TAC raised numerous significant criticisms of the study – two rounds of review comments and responses from Rutgers (over 100 pages, be glad to provide upon request).

This is a classic example of “manufacturing doubt” – by injecting false uncertainty into science to undermine findings you disagree with.

The New England group – at EPA and or DEP request – is conducting a peer review process of the work. They refused to provide the documents to me so I obtained them by FOIA to EPA. So EPA views the report as “final”.

New England won’t release until peer review comments are in and DEP and EPA approve.

DEP is using TAC and approval powers to bury this report and prevent its release.

Ironiclly, the Report was published in the peer reviewed scientific literature in the March  edition of the journal Estuaries and Coasts – that version provided upon request as swell – just email me.

The fact that the study passed scientific journal peer reviews but not DEP strongly suggests that DEP is blocking it for political reasons. – end update.]

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:
  1. No comments yet.
Comment pages
1 2 3 4 34519
  1. July 16th, 2014 at 16:29 | #1
  2. July 18th, 2014 at 07:50 | #2
  3. May 23rd, 2015 at 11:08 | #3
  4. May 23rd, 2015 at 23:05 | #4
  5. May 27th, 2015 at 09:43 | #5
  6. May 28th, 2015 at 05:22 | #6
  7. May 28th, 2015 at 05:49 | #7
  8. May 28th, 2015 at 05:52 | #8
  9. May 28th, 2015 at 05:53 | #9
  10. May 28th, 2015 at 06:01 | #10
  11. May 28th, 2015 at 06:04 | #11
  12. May 29th, 2015 at 15:47 | #12
  13. May 29th, 2015 at 16:58 | #13
  14. May 29th, 2015 at 17:05 | #14
  15. May 29th, 2015 at 17:24 | #15
  16. May 29th, 2015 at 20:55 | #16
  17. May 29th, 2015 at 23:40 | #17
  18. May 30th, 2015 at 04:41 | #18
  19. May 31st, 2015 at 02:58 | #19
  20. May 31st, 2015 at 04:35 | #20
  21. May 31st, 2015 at 05:43 | #21
  22. May 31st, 2015 at 08:11 | #22
  23. May 31st, 2015 at 10:25 | #23
  24. May 31st, 2015 at 12:22 | #24
  25. May 31st, 2015 at 14:39 | #25
  26. May 31st, 2015 at 17:38 | #26
  27. June 1st, 2015 at 11:35 | #27
  28. June 2nd, 2015 at 00:26 | #28
  29. June 2nd, 2015 at 14:04 | #29
  30. June 3rd, 2015 at 10:56 | #30
  31. June 4th, 2015 at 17:21 | #31
  32. June 4th, 2015 at 21:14 | #32
  33. June 4th, 2015 at 22:02 | #33
  34. June 5th, 2015 at 16:54 | #34
  35. June 5th, 2015 at 19:50 | #35
  36. June 6th, 2015 at 06:56 | #36
  37. June 6th, 2015 at 14:38 | #37
  38. June 7th, 2015 at 08:16 | #38
  39. June 7th, 2015 at 10:21 | #39
  40. June 7th, 2015 at 12:11 | #40
  41. June 7th, 2015 at 18:53 | #41
  42. June 8th, 2015 at 14:33 | #42
  43. June 10th, 2015 at 16:06 | #43
  44. June 11th, 2015 at 21:53 | #44
  45. June 18th, 2015 at 22:15 | #45
  46. June 24th, 2015 at 19:51 | #46
  47. June 25th, 2015 at 05:44 | #47
  48. June 25th, 2015 at 06:47 | #48
  49. June 25th, 2015 at 06:56 | #49
  50. June 25th, 2015 at 23:41 | #50
  51. June 26th, 2015 at 02:32 | #51
  52. June 26th, 2015 at 10:15 | #52
  53. June 26th, 2015 at 18:21 | #53
  54. June 26th, 2015 at 18:56 | #54
  55. June 26th, 2015 at 22:13 | #55
  56. June 27th, 2015 at 10:22 | #56
  57. June 27th, 2015 at 15:11 | #57
  58. June 27th, 2015 at 15:35 | #58
  59. June 27th, 2015 at 16:16 | #59
  60. June 28th, 2015 at 05:27 | #60
  61. June 28th, 2015 at 18:33 | #61
  62. June 29th, 2015 at 00:11 | #62
  63. June 30th, 2015 at 07:02 | #63
  64. July 1st, 2015 at 10:07 | #64
  65. July 1st, 2015 at 15:46 | #65
  66. July 1st, 2015 at 16:08 | #66
  67. July 2nd, 2015 at 00:35 | #67
  68. July 2nd, 2015 at 00:38 | #68
  69. July 2nd, 2015 at 12:08 | #69
  70. July 2nd, 2015 at 12:17 | #70
  71. July 2nd, 2015 at 12:24 | #71
  72. July 3rd, 2015 at 05:47 | #72
  73. July 3rd, 2015 at 07:38 | #73
  74. July 3rd, 2015 at 08:01 | #74
  75. July 3rd, 2015 at 08:43 | #75
  76. July 3rd, 2015 at 08:46 | #76
  77. July 3rd, 2015 at 16:13 | #77
  78. July 3rd, 2015 at 19:08 | #78
  79. July 3rd, 2015 at 19:19 | #79
  80. July 3rd, 2015 at 23:53 | #80
  81. July 4th, 2015 at 00:19 | #81
  82. July 4th, 2015 at 04:05 | #82
  83. July 4th, 2015 at 05:26 | #83
  84. July 4th, 2015 at 05:34 | #84
  85. July 4th, 2015 at 13:09 | #85
  86. July 4th, 2015 at 17:21 | #86
  87. July 4th, 2015 at 18:20 | #87
  88. July 4th, 2015 at 18:22 | #88
  89. July 4th, 2015 at 20:34 | #89
  90. July 4th, 2015 at 22:35 | #90
  91. July 5th, 2015 at 00:35 | #91
  92. July 5th, 2015 at 02:17 | #92
  93. July 5th, 2015 at 13:14 | #93
  94. July 5th, 2015 at 13:53 | #94
  95. July 5th, 2015 at 16:07 | #95
  96. July 5th, 2015 at 20:00 | #96
  97. July 5th, 2015 at 20:28 | #97
  98. July 6th, 2015 at 00:59 | #98
  99. July 6th, 2015 at 02:34 | #99
  100. July 6th, 2015 at 03:25 | #100
  101. July 6th, 2015 at 04:23 | #101
  102. July 6th, 2015 at 07:25 | #102
  103. July 6th, 2015 at 07:44 | #103
  104. July 6th, 2015 at 15:45 | #104
  105. July 6th, 2015 at 18:13 | #105
  106. July 6th, 2015 at 18:51 | #106
  107. July 6th, 2015 at 19:03 | #107
  108. July 7th, 2015 at 00:34 | #108
  109. July 7th, 2015 at 01:28 | #109
  110. July 7th, 2015 at 03:30 | #110
  111. July 7th, 2015 at 05:19 | #111
  112. July 7th, 2015 at 15:03 | #112
  113. July 7th, 2015 at 15:04 | #113
  114. July 7th, 2015 at 17:33 | #114
  115. July 7th, 2015 at 19:33 | #115
  116. July 7th, 2015 at 19:33 | #116
  117. July 7th, 2015 at 19:34 | #117
  118. July 7th, 2015 at 19:34 | #118
  119. July 7th, 2015 at 19:34 | #119
  120. July 7th, 2015 at 19:35 | #120
  121. July 7th, 2015 at 19:35 | #121
  122. July 8th, 2015 at 02:00 | #122
  123. July 8th, 2015 at 02:14 | #123
  124. July 8th, 2015 at 04:22 | #124
  125. July 8th, 2015 at 07:48 | #125
  126. July 8th, 2015 at 13:33 | #126
  127. July 8th, 2015 at 14:55 | #127
  128. July 8th, 2015 at 18:47 | #128
  129. July 8th, 2015 at 19:19 | #129
  130. July 8th, 2015 at 19:37 | #130
  131. July 8th, 2015 at 20:53 | #131
  132. July 8th, 2015 at 23:53 | #132
  133. July 9th, 2015 at 03:37 | #133
  134. July 9th, 2015 at 04:20 | #134
  135. July 9th, 2015 at 04:21 | #135
  136. July 9th, 2015 at 05:11 | #136
  137. July 9th, 2015 at 10:56 | #137
  138. July 9th, 2015 at 12:01 | #138
  139. July 9th, 2015 at 13:01 | #139
  140. July 9th, 2015 at 13:22 | #140
  141. July 9th, 2015 at 13:29 | #141
  142. July 9th, 2015 at 15:34 | #142
  143. July 9th, 2015 at 21:18 | #143
  144. July 9th, 2015 at 21:55 | #144
  145. July 9th, 2015 at 22:23 | #145
  146. July 10th, 2015 at 03:11 | #146
  147. July 10th, 2015 at 15:18 | #147
  148. July 10th, 2015 at 18:04 | #148
  149. July 10th, 2015 at 23:30 | #149
  150. July 10th, 2015 at 23:49 | #150
  151. July 11th, 2015 at 04:05 | #151
  152. July 11th, 2015 at 04:05 | #152
  153. July 11th, 2015 at 04:20 | #153
  154. July 11th, 2015 at 07:19 | #154
  155. July 11th, 2015 at 14:16 | #155
  156. July 11th, 2015 at 14:29 | #156
  157. July 11th, 2015 at 20:50 | #157
  158. July 11th, 2015 at 23:50 | #158
  159. July 12th, 2015 at 03:29 | #159
  160. July 12th, 2015 at 04:16 | #160
  161. July 12th, 2015 at 14:34 | #161
  162. July 12th, 2015 at 17:32 | #162
  163. July 12th, 2015 at 22:09 | #163
  164. July 12th, 2015 at 22:30 | #164
  165. July 13th, 2015 at 01:52 | #165
  166. July 13th, 2015 at 02:44 | #166
  167. July 13th, 2015 at 02:45 | #167
  168. July 13th, 2015 at 02:46 | #168
  169. July 13th, 2015 at 08:52 | #169
  170. July 13th, 2015 at 11:36 | #170
  171. July 13th, 2015 at 12:22 | #171
  172. July 13th, 2015 at 12:41 | #172
  173. July 13th, 2015 at 13:03 | #173
  174. July 13th, 2015 at 13:34 | #174
  175. July 13th, 2015 at 13:43 | #175
  176. February 1st, 2016 at 21:57 | #176
  177. May 4th, 2019 at 16:04 | #177
You must be logged in to post a comment.