Press Release

As major climate change challenges loom, redoubling efforts to restore the Bay’s native oyster will pay dividends

With Chesapeake Bay oyster recovery at a crucial point, building on current momentum will increase resiliency to climate change in the region while creating multiple benefits for people and the environment, according to a new report released today by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. 

Recommendations in the report, titled “Hope on the Half Shell: Harnessing Oysters to Build Ecological and Community Resilience,” include targeting oyster restoration in 20 additional Bay rivers, equitably growing the oyster aquaculture industry, and modernizing management of the wild oyster harvest.

“Oysters are the bedrock of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem, long recognized for their ability to provide habitat and improve water quality. But their benefits to communities and the ecosystem extend far beyond that,” said CBF Maryland Executive Director Allison Colden. “Oysters are key to adapting to climate change, supporting local economies, and cleaning up waterways. You can’t overstate their importance to the Bay.” 

But oysters are at a critical juncture. Over the last century, Chesapeake Bay oyster numbers plummeted to just a fraction of historic levels due to disease, overharvesting, pollution, and habitat loss. 

The decline of oysters and their habitat has exacerbated water quality issues, reduced productivity of key Bay fisheries, and left critical shoreline habitats like marshes and underwater grasses susceptible to erosion and loss.

Fortunately, the Chesapeake Bay is now home to some of the most successful oyster restoration projects in the world. Under the 2014 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement, federal-state efforts are on track to fully restore 11 Chesapeake Bay tributaries for oyster habitat by 2025. Monitoring of these restored reefs shows incredible success, with most reefs sustaining or expanding while meeting or exceeding criteria for oyster abundance. 

“Restoring native oyster habitat and populations in ten tributaries is one of the few material outcomes set by the Chesapeake Watershed Agreement that will actually be achieved by 2025,” said Don Boesch, President Emeritus of the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science. “But this is just the beginning, not the end, for recovery of the Bay’s oyster population.” 

Large-scale oyster restoration achievements have been possible through strong federal investment, state support, and the collaboration of many partners. As this major phase nears completion, sustained federal funding and state support will be crucial.

“With all the elements for success now in place, it’s time to seize the moment and accelerate the pace and scale of oyster recovery in Chesapeake Bay,” said Colden. 

This comes as Maryland and Virginia ramp up work to address the effects of climate change. Oysters can play an important role in protecting Chesapeake Bay shorelines and marshes from erosion, sea-level rise, and intense storms.  

As momentum, funding, and expertise coalesces around oysters, recommendations in the report for immediate next steps include:

• Accelerate the pace and scale of large-scale oyster restoration projects, restoring an additional 20 Bay tributaries by 2035 that collectively encompass 4,000 acres or more of restored oyster reef.
• Grow Maryland’s oyster aquaculture industry to 50,000 acres under lease and 500,000 bushels harvested annually by 2035. That compares to 7,500 acres under lease and 94,000 bushels harvested for Maryland oyster aquaculture in 2022.  
• In Virginia, initiate an oyster stock assessment, ensure aquaculture growth in all regions, and ensure that oyster aquaculture leases are effectively utilized. 
• Increase the use of oysters in shoreline protection and restoration to address sea-level rise and erosion from more intense storms due to climate change. 
• Modernize oyster fishery management to increase oyster numbers. That includes utilizing the most up-to-date scientific information and methods, implementing harvest quotas, and using electronic harvest reporting.
• Manage oyster shell to grow this critical resource for oyster restoration, as well as oyster replenishment work to support oyster fisheries. 

The report recommendations aim to achieve six vital outcomes for Maryland and Virginia, which are: 

• Improved water quality;
• Equitable economic opportunities for coastal communities;
• Increased resilience to sea-level rise and storm surge;
• Climate change mitigation; 
• Transparency and accountability in fishery management; and, 
• Modernized fishery management for sustainable harvests.

Oysters create significant economic benefits for Bay states. Sales of oysters brought in more than $56.8 million in revenue in Maryland and Virginia in 2022, and restoration reefs support millions more in revenue for other fisheries by providing key habitat for game fish and blue crabs. 

This comes alongside the growing recognition that coastal restoration efforts in the face of climate change must be undertaken holistically. For example, for the greatest benefits, new oyster reefs can be built in conjunction with underwater grasses, living shorelines, and buffers of native trees and shrubs. 

In addition, oyster restoration efforts take place in shallow water, an area where the recent Comprehensive Evaluation of System Response report indicated Chesapeake Bay restoration partners should focus near-term restoration efforts.

“Increasing oyster numbers benefits all facets of life in and along the Chesapeake,” said CBF Virginia Executive Director Chris Moore.  “Now let’s expand on the achievements to date. With oysters, we can adapt to climate change, support the Bay’s ecological, economic, and social resilience, and build vibrant communities where people and nature thrive together.” 

Bill Walton, who is the Shellfish Aquaculture Program Coordinator for the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, noted the importance of expanding aquaculture.  

“It’s exciting to see a restoration plan for Chesapeake Bay that embraces shellfish aquaculture as part of the solution. While many might think of the economic benefits of shellfish aquaculture and how those rely on a healthy Bay, the science is clear that shellfish aquaculture can provide environmental benefits,” Walton said. “As the report notes, reaching the ambitious environmental goals will require the diversity of people who care about Chesapeake Bay to work together creatively to achieve those outcomes.”

Boesch also expressed support for the report’s recommendations. 

“We must build on what we have learned to take the next steps recommended in this report by CBF,” Boesch said. “While bold, these recommendations are entirely feasible and achieving them will provide manifold benefits for society, ecosystem health, and climate resilience.”

* * *

Download an .mp4 audio file of the press conference

Download the .m4a video file of the press conference

Watch the video

Bills that Conserve Trees, Ban Toxic Products, and Strengthen Climate Resiliency Clear Crossover

Virginia state lawmakers marked the midpoint of their 60-day legislative session on February 13 with historic support for environmental issues.   

At this midpoint known as crossover, bills passed by the House and Senate are sent to the other chamber for consideration. If the bills clear both chambers, they head to Governor Youngkin’s desk to be signed into law, vetoed, or become law without a signature.  

Toxic Pavement Sealant Ban Within Reach 

For the first time since being introduced three years ago, a bill that bans toxic pavement sealants has cleared the House of Delegates by a 78-21 vote.  

If passed into law, toxic products used mainly to seal driveways and parking lots could no longer be sold in Virginia. Delegate Kathy Tran (House Bill 985) patroned the bill. Applied both commercially and privately, the sealant is a black liquid marketed as a pavement protector.  

These products contain high levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), which are toxic and carcinogenic chemicals that can harm people, birds, amphibians, fish, mammals, and plants. The bill would prohibit any pavement sealant with a PAH concentration greater than one percent by weight.  

Landmark Support for Tree Conservation  

Tree conservation has also enjoyed landmark support from lawmakers. Though tree legislation has historically stalled in the House of Delegates, multiple bills are now successfully moving through the General Assembly. These bills mainly give localities authority to conserve and replace trees, among the most cost-effective solutions to alleviating flood impacts and reducing pollution. 

HB 529, introduced by Del. Patrick Hope, would give localities broader authority to replace trees lost during construction. If passed into law, localities could establish tree replacement requirements and establish a tree fund if trees can’t be replaced on site. It heads to the Senate with a 53-44 vote from the House.  

Another bill, HB 1100, introduced by Del. Betsy Carr, would help cities and counties preserve trees before they are cut down, rather than replacing them. It enables all localities to conserve more trees during development. Currently, only some Northern Virginia localities have the authority to adopt tree conservation ordinances. This passed the House by a 52-46 vote. 

Lastly, HB 309 by Del. Patrick Hope and SB 461 by Sen. David Marsden would allow Virginia to determine how many acres of the Commonwealth’s forests are healthy, the cause behind the lost canopy acreage, how to reconnect forest fragments, and identify opportunities for further conservation efforts. HB 309 and SB 461 passed their respective chambers unanimously. 

Resiliency Bills Advance 

Two House bills that prepare Virginia to become a climate-ready Commonwealth are also heading to the Senate with widespread support. 

HB 1458, introduced by Del. Phil Hernandez, passed the House unanimously. This bill unifies the government’s climate change resources and adds oversight to flood protection funding. HB 673, introduced by Del. Michael Feggans, prioritizes low-income communities in the Virginia Resilient Revolving Loan Fund and ensures climate change solutions are equitable.   

Environmental Education Makes Strides 

Human impact on the environment and the value of Virginia’s natural resources are essential parts of state education standards, but many school districts aren’t connected to the resources needed to offer hands-on, inquiry-based learning opportunities through environmental education. The Chesapeake Bay Foundation is also supporting increased funding in the budget for Meaningful Watershed Educational Experiences that would be focused on environmental literacy.  

Chesapeake Bay Foundation Virginia Executive Director Chris Moore issued the following statement. 

“This historic support for critical environmental legislation is a huge step toward protecting Virginians and the environment from toxic products and flooding damage, while communities across the Commonwealth would benefit from cleaner air and water. We applaud these significant advancements by state lawmakers. 

“Virginia urgently needs to ramp up work to become a climate-ready Commonwealth. This landmark support from legislators from tree conservation to resiliency signals the importance to representatives of reducing carbon emissions, polluted runoff, strengthening flood protection, and reducing storm damage.” 

Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s Middle School Bay Eco-Camp offers outdoor adventures and environmental learning for students across the region

Middle school students passionate about nature, science, and the environment can experience a once-in-a-lifetime summer adventure at the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF)’s Middle School Bay Eco-Camp. The five-day overnight summer camp experience is designed for students entering sixth, seventh, and eighth grade who are interested in spending time outdoors and learning about the unique Chesapeake Bay.

“Bay Eco-Camp offers one of few summer opportunities for middle schoolers to get hands-on, up-close experiences with remote Bay ecosystems,” said Tom Ackerman, Vice President of Education at CBF. “During their adventure, campers will canoe, boat, interact with critters, and explore beaches and historic Chesapeake Bay communities.”

The camp is held at CBF’s Port Isobel Island Environmental Education Center. Port Isobel is a 250-acre island campus that is part of the Tangier Island, Virginia, community in the middle of the Chesapeake Bay. Throughout this ecologically diverse landscape, students will explore underwater grass beds, study vibrant oyster reefs, and discover the beauty of salt marshes surrounding a historic fishing community.

“I really enjoyed learning about the Chesapeake Bay and the flora and fauna that inhabits it,” said Callen Moore, eighth grade student from Virginia Beach. “Every day was filled with fun activities and exploring the environment.”

Campers can choose between two sessions available: July 15–19 or August 12–16. Space is limited and registration closes on June 3 for the first session and July 5 for the second. Student pick-up and drop-off will take place in Crisfield, Maryland. Interested students can learn more and register here.

CBF has been a leader in environmental education for over 50 years. Through student field and leadership programs, as well as professional learning opportunities, CBF educators have offered meaningful watershed experience to more than 1.5 million participants.

Isabel “Izzy” Snee and Mariah Saunders have joined the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) team as conservation coordinators, working to accelerate progress toward bringing impaired streams back to health in parts of four Pennsylvania counties.

The work by Snee and Saunders continues momentum created by Pequea Creek and Halfmoon Creek Watershed Implementation Plans coordinated by CBF. Their goals during the new five-year Pequea and Halfmoon Creeks Watershed Renewal Project are to reduce pollution and restore the health of streams in both watersheds that are impaired by nonpoint source runoff, like certain agricultural activities.

“The renewal project represents an evolution in CBF’s work to reduce pollution to Pennsylvania’s rivers and streams. Using our plans as a guide, this project will accelerate implementing key practices to bring streams back to health, improve wildlife habitat critical to critters like the brook trout, and enhance local appreciation of our local waters,” said Harry Campbell, CBF Science Policy and Advocacy Director in Pennsylvania. 

“Izzy and Mariah bring valuable experience to taking the renewal project to the next level,” Campbell added. “We are excited to have them working with farmers, landowners, and partners in Pequea and Halfmoon to get the plans implemented.”

The Pequea Creek watershed is in Lancaster and Chester counties. Halfmoon Creek watershed is in Centre and Huntingdon counties.

“Engaging with the community is the foundation of conservation,” Snee said. “It’s getting them interested and giving them the motivation as to why they should care. A lot of people already have that, they just don’t know what they can do in a practical sense. I’m looking forward to engaging with farmers, our partners in the Pequea Creek watershed, and hearing other ideas.”

“Building relationships within the Halfmoon Creek watershed represents a wide breadth of opportunities,” Saunders added. “The entire implementation plan and its success will rely heavily on partnerships constructed there.”

The basis for the renewal project is two innovative watershed management plans already completed by CBF, that combine emerging high-resolution watershed data and modeling with extensive local collaboration. The project will also offer a series of hands-on farmer-to-farmer conservation field days to teach and engage farmers through hands-on experiences.

Of the 240 miles of streams in the Pequea Creek watershed, the near-term priority is restoration of 41 miles that do not meet water quality standards for aquatic life. Under the Pequea plan, funding will be used to keep soils and nutrients on the land with such practices as cover crops, no-till agriculture, riparian buffers, streambank fencing, streambank stabilization, and other practices. 

Also in the Pequea watershed, access and use of non-motorized cover crop and no-till equipment will be available for use by Plain Sect farmers.

Snee, from Washington, D.C., joined CBF having served as a horticultural conservationist, engaging in field research collection, collaboration with botanic institutions, conservation agencies, and landowners,  tours and lectures at Longwood Gardens, Kennett Square, PA.

She worked for the Quivira Coalition in Montana in conservation agriculture and was a sustainable agricultural operator and cattle specialist with the renowned Warren Wilson College Farm in Asheville, N.C. She also interned at the Smithsonian Gardens in Maryland.  

Snee has a bachelor of science degree in Environmental Studies with a minor in Biology and a concentration in Sustainable Agriculture from Warren Wilson College. 

The goals for the Halfmoon Creek watershed are to reduce sediment, preserve critical landscapes, restore degraded landscapes, and foster stewardship of the watershed. Of the 32 miles of streams, a priority is restoring roughly 10 miles of headwaters in the Bald Eagle Region.

Saunders is from Annapolis, Md., and was recently at the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center serving as a teaching assistant in Food Systems and Sustainable Agriculture, and education intern.

She holds a bachelor of arts degree in Environmental Studies and Classical Civilizations from Wesleyan University. Her undergraduate thesis was on fostering cultural engagement and environmental stewardship through Place-Based Education in the Chesapeake Bay, earning her high honors from the Bailey College of the Environment. 

Funding acquired by Senators Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and Ben Cardin (D-Md.), is moving the five-year project forward. The senators requested $2.18 million for the Pequea Creek watershed restoration plan. Senator Casey sought an additional $1.06 million for the Halfmoon Creek watershed plan. The plans also are eligible for federal funding through the Clean Water Act and other sources.

Funding vital for development of both plans was made possible by the Richard King Mellon Foundation.

Legislation Centralizes Staff and Adds Oversight to Funds

Sea level rise and flooding are a growing part of Virginians’ lives, but the Commonwealth’s resources to contend with these threats are scattered across multiple government agencies.  

New legislation scheduled for a key committee vote in the Virginia General Assembly on February 7 unifies the government’s climate change resources and adds oversight to flood protection funding.  

To access resources that proactively address flooding and sea level rise, local communities navigate a patchwork system of state offices and programs. At the same time, the two state funds supporting flood protection needed greater transparency to ensure limited resources are maximizing their return on investment for the Commonwealth. 

Those were the recent findings of a group of 39 stakeholders including representatives from nonprofit, academia, government and industry organizations. The group met as part of a yearlong effort to enhance the state’s framework for dealing with climate change threats. 

A major outcome of those efforts recently got a boost from state lawmakers. HB 1458, introduced by Del. Phil Hernandez, cleared the House Chesapeake Subcommittee Feb. 5 by a 10-0 vote and is expected to be considered by the House Agriculture and Chesapeake and Natural Resources Committee Feb. 7.  

“This is critical legislation to get Virginia closer to a climate-ready Commonwealth. Localities need a comprehensive approach to protect their homes and businesses from increased flooding. This hub and spoke approach better supports the praiseworthy efforts of communities across the state while maximizing the value of state investments,” Hernandez said.  

At the core of the legislation is the centralization of climate resiliency efforts through the creation of the Office of Commonwealth Resilience, which would be nested under the Governor. It also increases transparency and oversight over the distribution of money from the Community Flood Preparedness Fund and Resilient Virginia Revolving Fund.  

Communities from Southwest Virginia to Fairfax to the Eastern Shore have tapped hundreds of millions of dollars from these funds to support community-scale projects to help with increased flooding. 

By merging climate adaptation efforts, the legislation gives local and state officials the ability to maximize federal, state, and private flood mitigation funding.  

“This is a major step in the right direction to better protect Virginians from climate change impacts already here and on the horizon. Unfortunately, flooding is only becoming more frequent. This legislation acknowledges that these issues are more than just natural resource issues, but public safety and economic issues as well,” said Chesapeake Bay Foundation Virginia Policy and Grassroots Advisor Jay Ford, who was a member of the stakeholder group.  

New Bill Would Provide Tools to Crack Down on Putrid Odors and Bay Contaminants

Maryland should no longer be a dumping ground for industrial sludge, a growing concern that new bipartisan legislation introduced today by primary sponsors Delegate Sara Love and Senator Justin Ready intends to address. The bill supported by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, ShoreRivers, Chesapeake Legal Alliance, and other environmental groups would close a loophole that allows industrial sludge to be stored and applied to farmland without adequate regulation.

House Bill 991 / Senate Bill 1074 creates a new permit program for the hauling, storage, and proper application of “dissolved air flotation” (DAF) material, which is a kind of industrial sludge of growing concern to farmers and communities. DAF residuals are derived from the protein rendering process and are frequently applied to farmland as an agricultural fertilizer. The proposed legislation would strengthen Maryland’s regulation of DAF by requiring its handlers hold a permit, giving the Maryland Department of the Environment and Maryland Department of Agriculture additional tools to better account for its safe and effective use.

Hauling, storing, and applying industrial sludge in Maryland has become a profitable business due to the state’s lax permitting and oversight. Sludge is often put in large, open tanks or lagoons and is spread on farm fields without clear knowledge of what’s in it or how much is being applied. Residents living near these areas face unbearable odors, flies, health impacts, threats to water quality, and more.

“Industrial sludge that’s generated by DAF is the leftover material from poultry, fish, and other protein products that rendering companies need to dispose of,” said Alan Girard, Eastern Shore Director at the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. “The material is tested far less rigorously than other waste like sludge or biosolids from municipal wastewater plants, and its makeup when land applied is not well-understood. In other words, we don’t truly know what’s being dumped on our state’s farmland, and what’s ultimately running off into the Chesapeake Bay.”

Other states like Delaware and Virginia require a permit to transport and spread industrial sludge. Since Maryland does not, the state’s farmland has become an attractive dumping ground for the material’s generators. According to a 2023 study by the University of Maryland, more than half of the industrial sludge land-applied in Maryland in recent years came from other states. All of this is happening at a time when a consensus among leading Bay scientists has emerged concluding that we cannot restore water quality without addressing the regional imbalances in nutrient pollution. If we are to address this, we must gain a better understanding of where the nutrients are coming from, where they are going, and better control how they are handled.

“There’s more sludge coming into Maryland than there are places to safely store it, which is why we’re seeing such blatant mishandling and irresponsible land application. In most cases this isn’t farming, it’s dumping,” said Matt Pluta, Choptank Riverkeeper. “We are calling on Maryland legislators to better assess what’s in this sludge material and enforce permits to prevent Maryland from drowning in it.”

In addition to enduring the horrific odor, residents are concerned for their health, local economies, and waterways. 

Cheryl Lewis lives near an industrial sludge site in Talbot County. In a letter to the Star Democrat, she wrote, “Under the guise of ‘[agricultural] use’, DAF from seafood and chicken processing and municipal wastewater plant sludge from outside of Talbot County was dumped in heaping mounds, permitted to sit in the open, rotting from exposure, with unregulated runoff entering our waterway. The stench was gut wrenching.”

Community concerns over sludge are widespread. Public hearings in Caroline, Carroll, Talbot, Dorchester, and Wicomico Counties were attended by residents outraged by the threats to human health, the environment, and personal livelihood caused by poor sludge handling. While some counties like Caroline and Wicomico have acted to ban storage of the material, many are seeking a statewide solution.

Primary bill sponsor Maryland Delegate Sara Love represents constituents in Montgomery County and Senator Justin Ready represents citizens in Carroll and Frederick Counties.

“Public nuisances related to the use of industrial sludge in agriculture are a growing concern in communities across Maryland,” said Delegate Love. “Mishandling and overapplication of sludge can lead to nutrient runoff that has negative impacts on waterways and the Bay. This bipartisan legislation will bridge gaps in current state regulation to ensure that farmers who use this material know exactly what is in it and use it in a way that does not overburden their neighbors and the Bay, while giving our regulators additional tools to crack down on the bad actors.”

“I have been contacted by many of my constituents about the use of industrial sludge as an exclusive fertilizer,” said Senator Ready. “The most common complaint is that unlike manure and other types of traditional fertilizers, the smell does not dissipate. This forces neighbors—many of whom are in farming themselves—to abandon spending any time outdoors for most warm weather days of the year.  My hope is that we can reach an agreement that will satisfy both approved nutrient management programs and allow the surrounding community quality of life.”

Bipartisan Votes Signal Momentum for Broader Local Authority to Preserve Trees

Tree conservation picked up historic momentum in the Virginia General Assembly this session, getting local leaders one step closer to preserving and replacing more trees. The advancement comes as Virginia faces an alarming loss of tree canopy along with climate change threats. 

“Virginia’s tree loss is clearly trending in the wrong direction. This is a climate change and equity issue. Local leaders are asking for ways to expand their tree canopy so they can cost-effectively reduce flooding, manage stormwater, and reduce the health impacts of urban heat islands and air pollution for their residents,” Del. Karen Keys-Gamarra, who introduced a bill that enables more statewide tree conservation, said.  

Though tree conservation bills have historically stalled in the House of Delegates, multiple bills are now successfully moving through the General Assembly.  

The progress signals landmark support from Virginia lawmakers.  

Development, hotter wildfires, road widenings, invasive species, and increased energy infrastructure have all contributed to a net loss of 9,548 acres of urban and forest canopy between 2014 and 2018 in the Commonwealth. New imagery is anticipated to show an accelerated loss of tree canopy.  

“A climate-ready Commonwealth must be a greener Commonwealth, and the easiest way for a locality to ensure they will have trees is to proactively preserve them,” Chesapeake Bay Foundation Virginia Director of Outreach and Advocacy Ann Jurczyk said. “Trees are ultimately about people. They do so much more than beautify neighborhoods. This legislation would give local leaders a natural and sustainable tool to keep their residents’ utility bills low, prevent their streets from flooding, and protect their backyard streams from erosion.” 

Trees absorb water and nutrients, enable soil to absorb rainfall more readily, and prevent erosion. Local leaders testifying in support of tree conservation bills have noted these abilities make trees one of the most productive and cost-effective ways to prevent polluted runoff from reaching waterways, protect streams, and alleviate flood impacts. A one-inch rainfall on a one-acre parking lot, for example, results in 27,154 gallons of water entering low-lying areas and streams. In a forest, the same amount of rainfall produces only 750 gallons of runoff.   

They also cool neighborhoods, reduce energy use, and beautify communities. Neighborhoods lacking trees suffer from heat islands, which correlate to heat-related hospital visits and, according to this Science Museum of Virginia study, can be concentrated in formerly redlined areas, raising environmental justice concerns.   

“We know that trees are some of the most important green infrastructure a city can tap into,” Bonnie Brown, Hampton’s Director of Community Development, said. 

On Thursday and Friday, over 30 community members helped the City of Norfolk and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation plant trees along a waterway in Poplar Hall Park to mitigate flooding and stream erosion. The project is part of Norfolk’s push to increase its tree canopy from its current 23 percent.  

Watching parking lots and buildings replace green landscape topped the list of concerns for a number of the 90 Virginians who traveled from across the state Jan. 30 to meet with their representative during the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s Clean Water Lobby Day.   

The General Assembly bills aiming to protect trees include:  

• HB 529 introduced by Del. Patrick Hope
  • Currently, localities have limited authority to replace trees lost during construction.  The bill provides all localities with the authority to establish tree replacement requirements and enables localities to establish a tree fund if trees cannot be replaced on site. 
  • This bill cleared the House Counties Cities and Towns committee Feb. 2 by a 12-9 vote. 
• HB 170 introduced by Del. Karen Keys-Gamarra and HB 1100 introduced by Del. Betsy Carr
  • Currently, only Planning District 8 consisting of Northern Virginia localities, has the authority to adopt tree conservation ordinances. These bills enable all localities to conserve more trees during development.    
  • HB 170 was incorporated into HB1100 and passed the House Cities Counties and Towns committee on Feb. 2 by a 12-10 vote.   
• HB 459 introduced by Del. Richard Sullivan and SB 121 introduced by Sen. Suhas Subramanyam
  • Under these bills, localities can incentivize developers to conduct an assessment—before a site plan is submitted for approval—and take necessary precautions to preserve existing healthy trees. It also allows tree funds to be used for tree maintenance.   
  • HB 459 passed the House of Delegates by a 53-42 vote on Jan. 26 and has now been referred to the Senate Committee on Local Government. SB121 passed the Senate by a 40-0 vote on Feb. 1. 
• HB 309 by Del. Patrick Hope and SB 461 by Sen. David Marsden
  • The Forest Conservation Act would allow Virginia to determine how many acres of the Commonwealth’s forests are healthy, the cause behind the lost canopy acreage, how to reconnect forest fragments, and identify opportunities for further conservation efforts.   
  • HB 309 passed the House Natural Resources subcommittee Jan. 24 by a 10-0 vote and has now been referred the House Committee on Appropriations. 
• Mitigate tree loss due to road construction.
  • The Chesapeake Bay Foundation also urges legislators to support a budget amendment that directs the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to study the loss of forest and urban tree canopy due to road construction and create a restoration plan.  

An expansion of tree cover is among the critical environmental issues CBF is prioritizing this legislative session.  

Ahead of a Feb. 5 court hearing, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation has filed a supporting brief arguing for Virginia’s continued participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).  

Last year, the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), representing four organizations, filed a lawsuit challenging Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s repeal of regulations that govern Virginia’s participation in RGGI.  

In a Nov. 3 ruling, the Fairfax Circuit Court dismissed three petitioners, all conservation organizations, for lack of standing. The case was transferred to Floyd County, where the remaining plaintiff is based, and an initial hearing is scheduled to take place Feb. 5. 

In its amicus curiae brief, CBF supported the petitioners’ request to suspend Virginia’s withdrawal from RGGI while the case is pending. The brief emphasizes the importance of RGGI in providing consistent and dedicated funding to community flood prevention projects that prioritize nature-based resiliency solutions across Virginia. These projects reduce the impacts of sea level rise and flooding as well as improve water quality.  

Virginia joined RGGI in 2020 through legislation passed in the General Assembly. The program, implemented in 12 Eastern states, sets a regional limit on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. Each power plant must pay for each ton of carbon dioxide (CO2) it emits at quarterly auctions. The emissions cap lowers over time, leading to cleaner air and less pollution to waterways while reducing emissions that contribute to climate change. 

The proceeds from RGGI’s auctions directly benefit Virginia’s residents: 45 percent of the revenue in Virginia goes to the Community Flood Preparedness Fund, which supports resilience efforts from the Eastern Shore to southwest Virginia, particularly in communities that may not be eligible for a loan.  

In just two years, RGGI raised more than $600 million, and Virginia has awarded approximately $97.7 million for community flood prevention projects.  

These projects support combatting the impact of severe storms that increase stormwater runoff, increase nutrient and sediment loads to the Bay watershed, and threaten to drown critical wetlands as well as destroy properties.  

Chesapeake Bay Foundation Virginia Staff Attorney Patrick Fanning issued the following statement: 

“Virginia’s participation in RGGI is critical to addressing climate change and protecting communities from flooding. We will continue to support efforts to keep Virginia in RGGI, as well as efforts that prioritize nature-based resiliency projects.”  

“RGGI was the only dedicated source of funding for community, nature-based projects that prevent flooding and reduce pollution. It was a critical piece in not only protecting the environment against the reality of rising seas and climate change, but Virginians as well. Our brief urges the court to allow this important program to continue operating while the case proceeds.” 

Today’s decision by the Appellate Court of Maryland affirming Baltimore stormwater permits is a loss for clean water. The court’s response stems from a 2021 lawsuit and petition for judicial review brought by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) and Blue Water Baltimore (BWB) that challenged the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE)’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permits for Baltimore City and Baltimore County. 

MS4 permits are intended to improve stormwater management and reduce pollution. However, after review by BWB, CBF, and others, the groups contended that the permits do not sufficiently ensure that urban and suburban pollution is reduced. 

The permits allow Baltimore City and County to rely on short-sighted, ineffective solutions. While practices such as street sweeping and certain stream restoration projects nominally meet MDE’s water quality requirements, they do little to reduce flooding and polluted runoff. The permits also do not address the increasing frequency and severity of rainfall and severe weather from climate change. The flooding that occurs during these events is disproportionately harming vulnerable communities that are most directly impacted by flooding and overflows of polluted stormwater.

“These permits shortchange Baltimore residents suffering from flooding and don’t do enough to prevent polluted runoff to local waterways,” said CBF’s Environmental Justice Staff Attorney Taylor Lilley. 

“Urban and suburban stormwater runoff is the only major source of pollution that is continuing to increase.  When the government’s goal is to meet permit requirements—not reduce pollution and flooding—the residents bear the financial burden of flooded streets and homes.”

“We’re deeply disappointed with the court’s decision, because it keeps the financial burden of poor stormwater management squarely on the shoulders of those who can least afford it,” said Alice Volpitta, Baltimore Harbor Waterkeeper with Blue Water Baltimore. “Baltimore residents deserve cleaner waterways, less inland flooding, and fewer sewage backups into their homes. We’ll continue our work with communities and agencies to achieve those goals, in spite of this weak permit.” 

In December 2021, CBF and BWB filed petitions in the Circuit Courts for Baltimore City and Baltimore County seeking review of these MS4 permits. Hearings on the merits were held, but both courts affirmed the MS4 permits and denied our request for the permits to be remanded back to MDE for further consideration. CBF and BWB appealed these decisions to the Appellate Court of Maryland and the two cases were consolidated. Arguments were heard in October 2023.

“MS4 permits are the only mechanism that Maryland currently has to address urban stormwater pollution, a sector in which Maryland is falling behind. Updated every five years, today’s permits only require that the mechanisms be effective enough to deal with a one-inch storm event, which is nowhere near our current reality due to the changing climate,” said CBF Maryland Executive Director Allison Colden.  

“Recent flooding events in the Wyndhurst neighborhood near Stony Run and the Ednor Gardens/Lakeside neighborhood have demonstrated the real-world impacts these events have on our communities,” Colden said. “Maryland residents deserve better than the repeated flooding, poor water quality, and long-term impacts that will result under these permits.”  

Chesapeake Bay Foundation Backs Legislation to Build Climate Change Resiliency

Tree conservation has taken center stage as seven new bills progress through the Virginia General Assembly. Introduced in both House and Senate chambers, these bills mainly give local governments broader authority to preserve and replace trees during the development process.  

“The alarming loss of our tree canopy has ripple effects for Virginians who are seeing their backyard streams erode, their streets flood, and their utility bills increase,” Chesapeake Bay Foundation Virginia Director of Outreach and Advocacy Ann Jurczyk said. “These bills empower local governments with tools to preserve their trees, enhance their communities, and prepare Virginia to be a climate-ready Commonwealth.” 

The bills are advancing through the House and Senate with bipartisan support. 

Virginia continues to lose trees at a significant rate, even though they are among the most cost-effective strategies to prepare communities for climate change threats, including school closures, heat islands, property destruction, and overflowing stormwater drains.   

Between 2014 and 2018, the state suffered a net loss of 9,548 acres of both intact forest and urban tree canopy. New imagery is anticipated to show accelerated loss due to the widening of interstates, hotter wildfires, greater invasive species, and increased energy infrastructure.  

Trees absorb water and nutrients, enable soil to absorb rainfall more readily, and prevent erosion. These abilities make them one of the most productive and cost-effective ways to prevent polluted runoff from reaching waterways, protect streams, and alleviate flood impacts. A one-inch rainfall on a one-acre parking lot, for example, results in 27,154 gallons of water entering low-lying areas and streams. In a forest, the same amount of rainfall produces only 750 gallons of runoff.  

They also cool neighborhoods, reduce energy use, and beautify communities. Neighborhoods lacking trees suffer from heat islands, which correlate to heat-related hospital visits and, according to this Science Museum of Virginia study, can be concentrated in formerly redlined areas, raising environmental justice concerns.  

The General Assembly bills aiming to protect trees include: 

• HB 529 introduced by Del. Patrick Hope
  • Currently, localities have limited authority to replace trees lost during construction.  The bill provides all localities with the authority to establish a floor, not a ceiling, on tree replacement requirements and enables statewide adoption of tree conservation language.  
• HB 170 introduced by Del. Karen Keys-Gamarra and HB 1100 introduced by Del. Betsy Carr
  • Currently, only Planning District 8 consisting of Northern Virginia localities, has the authority to adopt tree conservation ordinances. These bills enable all localities to conserve more trees during development, provide incentives to preserve mature trees, and add flexibility for tree funds.  
  • HB 170 passed the House Cities Counties and Towns Subcommittee on Jan. 18 by a 6-2 bipartisan vote.  
• HB 459 introduced by Del. Richard Sullivan and SB 121 introduced by Sen. Suhas Subramanyam
  • Under these bills, localities can incentivize developers to conduct an assessment—before a site plan is submitted for approval—and take necessary precautions to preserve existing healthy trees. It also allows tree funds to be used for tree maintenance.  
  • HB 459 passed the House Cities Counties and Towns Committee by a 15-7 bipartisan vote on Jan. 19.  
• HB 309 by Del. Patrick Hope and SB 461 by Sen. David Marsden
  • The Forest Conservation Act would allow Virginia to determine how many acres of the Commonwealth’s forests are healthy, the cause behind the lost acreage, how to reconnect forest fragments, and identify opportunities for further conservation efforts.  
  • HB 309 passed the House Natural Resources Subcommittee Jan. 24 by a 10-0 vote. 
• Mitigate tree loss due to road construction.
  • The Chesapeake Bay Foundation also urges legislators to direct the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to study the loss of forest and urban tree canopy due to road construction and create a restoration plan. 

An expansion of tree cover is among the critical environmental issues CBF is prioritizing this legislative session.