Press Statement

Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger on Friday requested that lawmakers add $2 million to the biennial budget for research into the Chesapeake Bay menhaden population—funding that is vital to understanding the key forage fish and its importance to Bay ecology.

Governor Spanberger and her team deserve enormous credit for recognizing the importance of this research and working toward a solution on moving it forward.

The Bay is facing a crisis, and this research must be completed without delay. The Virginia Institute of Marine Science has stated that data on menhaden in the Bay remains “woefully inadequate,” and developed a plan for a menhaden study in 2023 together with a wide variety of stakeholders.

State funding for menhaden research has been delayed every year since then. House lawmakers had included the funding in earlier versions of their budget proposals this year, but it was not in the final deal the General Assembly this week sent to the Governor’s desk.

Recent polling shows that about 80 percent of Virginia voters support both state funding for a menhaden study, and support ending large-scale commercial menhaden fishing in the Bay pending further research.

Virginia is the only state along the Atlantic coast that still allows industrial menhaden fishing in state waters. That lone remaining industrial operation extracts over 100 million pounds of menhaden from Chesapeake Bay waters each year, with no scientific understanding of the impacts to the Bay’s ecology or coastal communities.

Menhaden are a small fish that are an important food for many species, including osprey, striped bass, bluefish, whales, and dolphins.

This month, a Bay-wide peer-reviewed study of osprey found widespread reproductive failure, documented an 80% decline in menhaden deliveries to nests, and concluded that menhaden availability is likely the primary driver.

For years, watermen, recreational anglers, birdwatchers, and local residents have reported seeing fewer menhaden schools and struggling osprey colonies.

Chesapeake Bay Foundation Forage Campaign Manager Will Poston issued the following statement:

“Governor Spanberger has shown important leadership in the face of persistent and likely worsening menhaden problems in the Chesapeake Bay. This is a solid down payment on urgently needed research.”

“Unfortunately, many questions remain about the health of the Bay’s menhaden population and the iconic species such as osprey that depend upon it. This is precisely why independent science on menhaden in the Bay is so important.”

“We want to thank Governor Spanberger, and we thank Delegate Betsy Carr in particular for her persistence on this issue. We urge the General Assembly to support this amendment.”

The Pennsylvania House of Representatives yesterday passed a suite of bills aimed at addressing mounting concerns around data center development.

Data centers are already affecting Pennsylvanians by using significant quantities of public water resources, increasing electricity bills, and filling communities with noise and harmful air pollution from diesel generators.

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) is greatly concerned about the lack of transparency and regulation around the construction of data centers in Pennsylvania. Without proper controls, data centers pose significant risks to Pennsylvania communities, the health of local streams, the Susquehanna River, and the Chesapeake Bay, and the air we breathe.

Measuring and monitoring environmental impacts of these major projects is key to protecting water quality. But many data center sites are currently not required to address these environmental concerns during and after construction.

CBF supported three bills just passed in the House that would increase regulations related to data center water usage and require reporting environmental data. They also empower local communities to regulate data centers by enacting updated zoning laws. Those include:

• HB 2150 requires data centers to report annual water and energy use.
• HB 2151 empowers municipalities to regulate data centers through a guided framework of local zoning and ordinances.
• HB 2246 ensures large data centers cannot move forward without clear guardrails by strengthening water-use permits, monitoring impacts, and protecting local communities’ access to clean water.
• CBF is also supportive of Governor’s Shapiro’s Governor’s Responsible Infrastructure Development (GRID) standards, a bill that also just passed in the House.

This may establish strict guardrails to hold data centers accountable to environmental standards.

These measures now move on to the Pennsylvania Senate, where they must be adopted and then signed by Governor Shapiro before becoming law.

CBF Pennsylvania Executive Director Julia Krall issued the following statement:

“Pennsylvania just took a mighty step forward in fighting the mounting threats from data centers. The fact that these data center projects are not required to report their electricity and water usage or environmental impacts is a major concern. We simply cannot understand threats we do not regulate or measure.”

“Pennsylvanians suffer when these data center sites destroy clean water and air. We must empower these communities with legislation that works for them, their families and homes, and their rivers and streams. We urge the Senate to protect Pennsylvania’s people and waterways by swiftly passing these bills.”

Repeated delays on science reaffirm need to pause reduction fishery in Chesapeake Bay

House and Senate lawmakers in Virginia announced a deal this weekend on a two-year state budget that once again does not include much-needed funding to study the Chesapeake Bay’s menhaden population—bowing to pressure from industry to delay this vital research.

The funding, which had been included in previous House budget proposals this year, is critical for understanding the population of menhaden in the Bay and the impacts of industrial factory fishing.

This year marks the third in a row since the state developed a study plan with Omega Protein, conservationists, and academics. Each year industry delay tactics have helped kill the funding, despite broad support from Virginians who want to see this fishery managed with better science.

Recent polling shows that 80 percent of Virginia voters support state funding for a menhaden study, and 79 percent support pausing the fishery in the Bay until research is completed. This research would help show exactly what risks the industrial menhaden fishery poses to the Bay and better inform how many menhaden the Bay ecosystem needs to thrive.

Menhaden are foundational to a healthy Chesapeake Bay. They serve as highly nutritious food to some of the most iconic and important species in the Bay, including striped bass, osprey, red drum, and whales.

Estimates in 2025 from Maine to Florida show that there are far fewer menhaden up and down the East Coast than previously thought. Menhaden catches by small-scale watermen in the Bay have declined significantly in recent years. Osprey chicks are starving to death at unprecedented rates in parts of the Bay where they traditionally rely on menhaden for food. Amid these intensifying warning signs and absent new research, the only commonsense remedy is to pause the industrial menhaden fishery in the Bay.

Existing research focuses on the coastwide menhaden population in the Atlantic Ocean—there is no menhaden-specific science in the Chesapeake Bay estuary, where industrial fishing pressure is heavily concentrated. Additional research is needed to understand exactly why the Bay is flashing red warning signs on menhaden.

Virginia is the only state along the Atlantic coast that still allows industrial menhaden fishing in its state waters. That lone remaining industrial operation—foreign-owned Omega Protein and their fishing partner Ocean Harvesters—extracts over 100 million pounds of menhaden from Chesapeake Bay waters each year.

The Virginia Institute of Marine Science has stated that data on menhaden in the Bay remains “woefully inadequate,” and developed a plan for a menhaden study in 2023 together with the industry and other groups.

Chesapeake Bay Foundation Forage Campaign Manager Will Poston issued the following statement:

“No science, no industrial fishing. With one massive industry continuing to empty the Chesapeake Bay, Virginia must pause menhaden reduction fishing in the Bay.”

“The menhaden industry has not once offered public support for funding state menhaden research. The continued political pressure from Omega Protein and their McGuireWoods lobbyists to delay science is damning—and should concern everyone who cares about the Bay.”

“Meanwhile, Chesapeake Bay watermen are seeing menhaden catches plummet, blue crab fishermen are spending more on bait, and osprey chicks are starving to death.”

Virginia lawmakers in the House and Senate this weekend rolled out a compromise proposal for the biennial budget that starts on July 1, which unfortunately shortchanges clean water and conservation priorities in the first budget that will be enacted under the revised Chesapeake Bay agreement.

Among the most concerning items: steering nearly half of revenues from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a regional carbon trading program for power plants, away from programs like flood preparedness and energy efficiency efforts for low-income residents to accommodate recent scare tactics from the power industry over utility rates.

The proposal moves toward requiring data centers to use recycled water or other non-wasteful means for cooling—one of the standards the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF), the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), and Appalachian Voices had urged lawmakers to develop. Unfortunately, the deal largely fails to tackle the environmental impacts of data centers, which are increasingly threatening the water and air quality in Virginia and consuming massive amounts of energy—helping drive up consumer utility bills.

At the same time, the budget proposal maintains a state sales and use tax break for data centers that cost Virginia about $1.9 billion last year alone and directs a panel to study potential reforms that won’t report back to lawmakers until December. The deal also establishes a $1.2 billion fee tied to data center energy consumption.

In one positive, for 2027 the deal also fully funds the Virginia Agricultural Cost-Share Program, which helps farmers install projects that reduce pollution to local waterways.

But overall, negotiators did not include sufficient funding for an array of other clean water and conservation priorities as well.

Those include:

• Wastewater treatment plant funding. The budget deal adds almost $189 million for matching grants for wastewater treatment improvement projects, bringing investments up to $329.5 million for the state share of wastewater treatment plant improvements. This is short of Virginia’s own needs assessment to upgrade our wastewater systems. The ongoing modernization of wastewater treatment plants has greatly reduced pollution to the Chesapeake Bay.
• Virginia Conservation Assistance Program. The deal includes $4 million for the Virginia Conservation Assistance Program, which helps private property owners and community groups install nature-based projects that cut stormwater pollution. CBF had pushed to increase funding to at least $8 million over the biennium, as the highly successful program is over-subscribed.
• Menhaden. The proposal does not include $2 million for much-needed research into the menhaden population in Commonwealth waterways that House lawmakers had included in earlier versions. Atlantic menhaden are a critical forage fish in the Bay serving as a food source for a variety of species including striped bass, redfish, humpback whales, and birds like osprey and bald eagles. Their abundance directly affects commercial and recreational fisheries, tourism, and coastal communities.
• Stormwater upgrades. House and Senate lawmakers included $43.5 million for the Stormwater Local Assistance Fund, which provides grants for stormwater design with an eye toward cutting water pollution. CBF had advocated for $50 million.

Chesapeake Bay Foundation Virginia Policy Manager Jay Ford issued the following statement:

“This budget deal fails to meet the moment and will mean dirtier air and water for residents of the Commonwealth.”

“We appreciate the investments in clean water resources, but had hoped to see more meaningful solutions addressing the harm to Virginia communities from the unchecked data center boom.”

“Virginia’s rejoining of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative is a step forward. But it’s shortsighted to shift almost half of all RGGI proceeds away from vital resilience programs to accommodate scare tactics from the power industry. Before pulling from underfunded programs that protect our communities and permanently lower electricity costs for low-income Virginians, we should look first to hold the industry accountable.”

“It’s encouraging that data centers could be required to use more environmentally friendly cooling methods, but there must be additional clean energy requirements if Virginia hopes to rein in their negative impacts on our air and water.”

“We are also deeply concerned that lawmakers failed to include funding for a much-needed study on the menhaden population in the Chesapeake Bay once again. This research is vital for understanding the flashing warning signs we are seeing for menhaden in the Bay.”

House and Senate lawmakers have introduced new competing proposals for Virginia’s biennial budget that starts on July 1—both of which unfortunately fall short when it comes to reining in the impacts of the data center industry and delivering the results Virginians deserve.

House lawmakers’ latest offer does not include any environmental standards for data centers, and maintains a state sales and use tax break that cost Virginia about $1.9 billion last year alone. Instead, it would establish a commission to consider reforms, with a report due back to lawmakers in the fall. It remains to be seen what reforms a commission might ultimately recommend, but what we do know is that this path would lead to further delay and uncertainty.

The Senate proposal, meanwhile, includes an “impact” fee for data centers that use diesel or gas-powered backup generators. It also does not include any reforms to the sales and use tax and exemption and does not sufficiently address many data center impacts including air pollution, climate, and adverse health effects related to the data center industry’s thirst for more fossil fuel generation.

Data centers are already affecting Virginians in many ways—driving up electricity bills, saddling communities with noise and harmful air pollution from diesel generators, and using significant quantities of public water resources. Without proper regulations, data centers pose significant risks to Virginia communities, the health of the Chesapeake Bay, and the Commonwealth’s air and waterways.

Virginia—predominantly Northern Virginia—is the data center capital of the world. This growth has shown no signs of slowing down, with new data centers popping up all over the state. Dominion, for example, expects that 51% of its electricity will be sold to data centers by 2035. In other words, most of the electricity from Virginia’s largest utility would not go to residential households, small businesses, churches, or schools—it would go to a single energy-hungry industry. It is time for lawmakers to rein in the escalating energy use and water consumption of these data centers.

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF), the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), and Appalachian Voices are calling for Virginia legislators to implement legislation—whether through the budget process or potentially a special session—that establishes reasonable safeguards on data centers now. Specifically, data centers should:

• Power their facilities with clean energy on their own dime;
• Be prohibited from building dirty power sources on-site that burden Virginia communities with harmful air pollution;
• Cut harmful impacts of backup diesel generators by maintaining at least two hours of non-polluting backup power at all times; and
• Fully offset their water consumption in water-scarce areas by using recycled water for cooling.

Chesapeake Bay Foundation Virginia Policy Manager Jay Ford issued the following statement:

“Virginia’s data center boom is moving faster than the law. This year, lawmakers must enact strong regulations for data centers that protect our air and water. Unless Virginia acts now, we’ll pay for the rapid expansion of data centers in the Commonwealth with our drinking water, clean air, and thriving waterways.”

Southern Environmental Law Center Senior Attorney Nate Benforado issued the following statement:

“Data centers continue to flock to our state, and it is hurting everyday Virginians. But this unfortunate dynamic is also an opportunity. Virginia can stand up and demand this industry be better neighbors and citizens.”

Appalachian Voices Director of State Energy Policy Peter Anderson issued the following statement:

“So far, the General Assembly has allowed the unconstrained development of polluting data centers in the Commonwealth, and this simply cannot continue. If our decisionmakers demand that the wealthiest industry in the world achieve sensible public health and environmental standards, the industry will do it.”

The river, once associated with pollution and degradation, has become a pillar for community enjoyment and recreation

Officials honored the Conestoga River as Pennsylvania’s River of the Year for 2026 today at a ceremony in Lancaster County Central Park, marking a significant milestone in the river’s comeback.

The event is a part of Lancaster Water Week, an annual celebration of the 1,400 miles of streams and rivers in Lancaster County, hosted by Lancaster Conservancy. This week of events encourages people to enjoy, learn, volunteer, and take action to clean and protect the waterways throughout the county.

Historically, the Conestoga River was highly polluted, and many tributaries are still considered impaired. However, the river has become a source of increased recreation and enjoyment for local communities. It received 2,510 votes for river of the year, demonstrating a local source of pride and engagement.

Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) Senior Watershed Planner Brian Gish is a Lancaster native, and led a multi-year effort, to develop a comprehensive plan to improve the headwaters of the Conestoga River.

Gish issued the following statement:

“How Lancaster has rallied around the Conestoga River has been nothing short of inspiring. My entire life, I’ve encountered negative perceptions of this waterway, but recently I’ve seen attitudes pivot. In my conversations with the watershed’s farmers, residents, and leaders, indifference is transforming into passion and action.”

“Countless projects are undoing centuries of damage, driven by a community—my community—reconsidering its relationship with this river. The Conestoga’s future is our future, and we’re taking steps to secure both. I’m seeing our river heal. If we stay the course, it will be healthy in our lifetimes.”

Ashley Spotts, CBF’s Lancaster Restoration Biologist, has spent more than two decades working on projects along the Conestoga as well. She specializes in planting riparian buffers, groups of trees along waterways to filter out pollutants.

Spotts issued the following statement:

“I’ve always had a passion for native plants, and I’ve worked 20 years with many farmers and landowners along the Conestoga River and its tributaries to plant trees in an effort to raise water quality. It feels so good to return to a planting years later and see a small forest, with fruiting persimmons and oaks branches weighted down with acorns. Not only will this provide resources for the plants and animals on land, but I know these trees mean healthier water as well.”

CBF, led by Spotts, is planning an event to be held in August, that will bring together landowners, farmers, and partners to launch a watershed improvement plan developed by Gish for the Upper Conestoga watershed. Developing quality plans in priority watershed areas, with support from partners and landowners, is central to CBF’s water improvement work throughout Pennsylvania.

As CBF celebrates forty years of protecting and restoring Pennsylvania’s environment, we want to celebrate all of the hard work of our people, partners, and communities. We are deeply thankful to be able to carry out the work we do, and we look forward to improving the rivers and streams of Pennsylvania together.

Report Adds Urgency for Pausing Menhaden Reduction Fishery in the Bay

A new peer-reviewed study links unprecedented levels of starving osprey chicks in the Chesapeake Bay to concerns around menhaden, a nutrient-packed fish that is a key food source for osprey and many other species.

While several factors influence osprey productivity, reduced availability of Atlantic menhaden is likely the primary driver of poor osprey reproduction in saltier parts of the Chesapeake Bay, according to the study. The new report is based on data from the 2024 nesting season and published this week in Frontiers in Marine Science by researchers at the College of William & Mary’s Center for Conservation Biology, the U.S. Geological Survey, the Maryland National-Capital Park and Planning Commission, and the Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center.

Research in recent years has documented osprey chicks starving in nests across portions of the Chesapeake Bay where osprey primarily rely on menhaden for food. Osprey in many parts of the region are reproducing at rates well below what’s needed to sustain the population.

Virginia is the only state along the Atlantic coast that still allows industrial menhaden fishing in state waters. That lone remaining industrial operation—Omega Protein and their fishing partner Ocean Harvesters—extracts over 100 million pounds of menhaden from Chesapeake Bay waters each year, with no scientific understanding of the impacts to the Bay’s ecology or coastal communities.

Widespread osprey nesting failures are among several warning signs that the menhaden population is struggling in the Bay, including plummeting catches by small-scale watermen who catch menhaden for bait for local crab fisheries.

In a 2025 letter to state fishery regulators, the Virginia Institute of Marine Science suggested the Virginia Marine Resources Commission give “serious consideration to reducing purse seine fishing in Chesapeake Bay,” given that data to understand impacts of concentrating the industrial menhaden fishery in Virginia waters remains “woefully inadequate.”

The new study notes that “a large degree of uncertainty remains about the status of adult menhaden within the Chesapeake Bay.” It adds, “To more fully resolve this uncertainty, assessments of menhaden abundance could enhance understanding of their role within the ecosystem and support management of consumers that depend on them.”

As part of the budget process that will wrap up later this month, Virginia legislators are considering investing in Chesapeake Bay menhaden research. These data are crucial to understanding the impacts of highly concentrated industrial harvests and how many menhaden a healthy Chesapeake Bay requires.

Recent polling shows that 80 percent of Virginia voters support state funding for a menhaden study.

Chesapeake Bay Foundation Forage Campaign Manager Will Poston issued the following statement: 

“Ospreys continue to tell us something is wrong. The science clearly demonstrates that declining menhaden numbers are driving this crisis. Virginia needs to listen.”

“Ultimately, decisionmakers must pause reduction fishing inside the Bay until menhaden research is completed. Pausing reduction fishing in the Bay is the safest option to protect current and future jobs, promote healthy and productive Bay wildlife and fisheries, allow more menhaden to mature, and safeguard this struggling estuary.”

The annual dead zone that threatens underwater life in the Chesapeake Bay is expected to be smaller than average this summer, according to a forecast issued today by the Chesapeake Bay Program and partners.

The dead zone forecast comes as much of the Chesapeake Bay region is experiencing a drought. Dead zone fluctuations from year to year are connected to weather, as well as efforts to keep nitrogen and phosphorus pollution out of waterways.

Runoff from rainstorms washes pollutants into the Bay. This pollution, together with wastewater treatment plant discharges, fuels algal blooms. When these algal blooms die and decompose, they use oxygen in the water and create dead zones. These are areas in the Bay and its rivers that don’t contain enough oxygen to support culturally and economically important animals such as fish, crabs, and oysters.

Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) Senior Vice President for Programs Alison Hooper Prost issued the following statement.

“A smaller dead zone forecast this summer is welcome news, but dry weather won’t save the Chesapeake Bay. We’re currently in a drought that could have devastating consequences for farmers. But the long-term trend for our region is wetter weather and more intense storms, which equals more polluted runoff and dirtier water.

“Federal and states leaders from across the region just signed an updated Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement. Now it’s time to put the plan into action with policies and investments needed to restore the Bay for generations to come. That includes funding for USGS monitoring efforts that support the dead zone forecast and help more efficiently and effectively restore the Bay.”

Number of Chesapeake Bay Blue Crabs Increased This Year, But Still Remain Below Average

Blue crabs in the Chesapeake Bay received both good news and bad news in the results released today from the annual blue crab winter dredge survey, conducted jointly by Virginia and Maryland.

The survey estimates a total of 349 million blue crabs in the Chesapeake Bay in 2026, slightly lower than the long-term average of 400 million crabs. This is a 46% increase from last year’s estimate of 238 million crabs, which was the second lowest number recorded since the survey began in 1990.

Juvenile blue crabs saw a significant increase after six consecutive years of below-average numbers. Adult male numbers are also up.

However, adult female crabs continued their decline and remain well below average. Female crab numbers are now just above the overfished “threshold” that Chesapeake Bay fisheries scientists and managers use to help determine both the health of the population and the need for appropriate conservation efforts.

While the increased numbers of juveniles and males are encouraging, the downward trend in the Bay’s adult female blue crab population is still concerning. Because females can bear millions of eggs, they are key to increasing the overall population.

As these annual results are released, scientists are also finalizing a multi-year draft stock assessment of the species that shows a troubling decline in the Bay’s blue crab population since 2011. While the assessment hasn’t determined one clear culprit for blue crabs’ decline, it will equip Maryland and Virginia with more data to make informed decisions on blue crab harvest moving forward.

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

“Despite a concerning long-term trend, this year’s winter dredge survey results fortunately show a promising bump in the number of both juvenile and male blue crabs. This could be a preview for bountiful crabbing businesses and crab feasts this summer.

“However, the Bay’s important adult female crabs experienced another year of decline. And there’s still immense uncertainty surrounding the health of blue crabs in the Chesapeake Bay.

“To support a strong blue crab population, the focus needs to remain on three fronts: preventing pollution, restoring important blue crab habitats such as underwater grasses and oyster reefs, and tackling the growing threat of blue catfish.

“We will work with fisheries managers and jurisdictions around the region to chart a brighter course for the Bay’s most iconic species, as called for in the latest update to the Chesapeake Bay Agreement. The results of this year’s winter dredge survey, along with the soon-to-be-released blue crab stock assessment, will be key.”

Provisions in the Bill Would Strip Funding and Allow Harvest on Restored Oyster Reefs

In a potentially devastating blow for protected Chesapeake Bay oyster reefs, the House Appropriations Committee today passed a funding bill for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that excludes protections and funds for oyster restoration in the Bay. The bill passed Committee 32-28 and will head to the House floor in the coming weeks.

Two harmful provisions in this bill (Sec. 586 and 587) would allow commercial fishing on protected oyster reefs and cut off restoration funds for oyster sanctuaries most in need of investment. Oyster sanctuaries in the Chesapeake Bay provide immense ecologic and economic benefits, and have received strong private, state, and federal investments under the promise that they will remain protected from harvest. These bill provisions completely undermine that promise and would be a huge setback in the region’s nonpartisan efforts to clean the Chesapeake Bay.

Oyster restoration has been one of the Bay’s greatest success stories. In fact, Maryland recently celebrated its highest year of oyster reproduction in decades. Since oyster sanctuaries were put in place, Maryland oyster harvests have rebounded to levels not seen since the 1980s.

Protected oyster reefs filter the water and create habitat for crabs and fish. They also support oyster harvest areas by producing baby oysters that spread and populate other reefs. But any harvest activity on protected reefs would severely damage those benefits. A recent study by Wade et al determined that harvesting oysters via dredging damages oyster habitat and fails to help oysters naturally reproduce in the Bay. Harvest prevents oysters from creating complex reef habitat, developing disease resistance to oyster pathogens, and limits oyster productivity by removing the largest oysters from the reef.

Despite proven success of oyster restoration, the first bill provision would restrict oyster restoration funds to only be used “if oysters planted using such funds are made eligible for managed commercial harvest by licensed watermen after a period of three years from the date of planting.”

The second would prevent funds to be spent “at any site that has been designated as underperforming for five or more years following initial federal investment.” While there is no clear definition of “underperforming,” this provision would block additional restoration funds for oyster reefs that may be struggling or that received less initial investment. These federal proposals mirror troublesome efforts at the state-level in Maryland to allow commercial harvest on protected sanctuary reefs.

Oysters are not the only resource taking a hit in this bill. NOAA’s Bay Watershed Education and Training (B-WET) environmental education grant program is funded at $7.7 million — down $1 million from last year. NOAA Fisheries’ habitat conservation and restoration work (nationwide) is funded at $35 million — down from $57 million from last year.

These proposed cuts would be detrimental to conservation and restoration work and research that helps protect native species like oysters, blue crabs, and striped bass; improves climate resilience in the region; and funds hands-on environmental education of the next generation of Bay stewards.

Chesapeake Bay Foundation Senior Policy Director Keisha Sedlacek issued the following statement: 

“This bill is a fast track to wrecking protected oyster reefs in the Bay. These provisions would derail decades of investment in the Chesapeake Bay’s thriving oyster sanctuaries, ignoring the promise that these reefs would be kept off-limits to harvest.

“It’s no coincidence that Maryland’s oyster population has tripled in the past few decades. Oyster restoration is working, and NOAA’s leadership in that effort is instrumental.

“We urge the House to reject these devasting provisions for oyster restoration. And we urge the Senate to stand firm for oysters in the Chesapeake Bay. This would be a horrific blow to decades of successful restoration and bi-partisan partnership.”