Press Statement

Funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) work to restore the Bay and its waterways, fisheries, and wildlife would take a serious hit in the fiscal year 2026 funding bill the House Appropriations Committee adopted yesterday by a vote of 34-28. 

Troubling provisions in the bill also would open restored oyster sanctuaries to commercial fishing and cut off restoration funds for sanctuaries where oyster numbers have been struggling to rebound. 

The first provision would only allow oyster restoration funds to 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, unless the Secretary of Commerce certifies in writing that the site has a new, independently conducted and peer-reviewed restoration plan that demonstrates a high likelihood of meeting significant ecological or economic outcomes within 2 years of enactment of this legislation.” 

The bill sets fiscal 2026 funding levels for the Department of Commerce and several federal science agencies. NOAA is part of the Commerce Department. 

The House Appropriations Committee bill would allocate $15 million for NOAA’s oyster restoration nationwide. It does not specify how much would fund work in the Bay region. In contrast, the Senate Appropriations Committee’s version would increase funding to restore oysters in the Bay to $4.5 million next year from the current level of $3 million. 

The House committee’s bill also calls for slashing spending on NOAA Fisheries’ habitat conservation and restoration work nationwide to $35 million in fiscal 2026, cutting $21.2 million from the current level of $56.2 million. The majority of the NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office’s work is funded by the NOAA Fisheries habitat restoration and conservation budget.  

The Chesapeake Bay Office leads conservation and restoration work and conducts 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.  

The Senate Appropriations Committee bill, approved in July, would bump funding for NOAA Fisheries habitat conservation and restoration funding up $1.5 million to $57.7 million next year. That’s $22.7 million, or nearly 40 percent, more than what the House Appropriations Committee would provide. 

The Trump administration fiscal 2026 budget would eliminate the NOAA Fisheries habitat conservation and restoration budget altogether. 

NOAA also funds the Bay Watershed Education and Training (B-WET) environmental education grant program. B-WET operates in seven regions of the country, including the Chesapeake Bay. Chesapeake B-WET grants provide financial support for elementary and secondary school students in the Bay region to study environmental issues facing their communities and how they affect the Bay and its local rivers and streams. 

Like its Senate counterpart, the House Appropriations Committee would hold funding for all regional B-WET grant programs, including Chesapeake B-WET, constant at $8.7 million in fiscal 2026. The committee also joined its Senate counterpart in rejecting the White House proposal to zero out funding for all NOAA education programs, including Chesapeake B-WET. 

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

“This bill could be a disaster for the Chesapeake Bay and its world renown fisheries.

“The massive cut to NOAA’s habitat research and restoration work could devastate efforts to protect economically important species like oysters, blue crabs, and striped bass.  Provisions to open restored oyster sanctuaries to commercial fishing and choke off funding for those struggling to recover would undermine one of the cleanup’s greatest successes so far—the large-scale restoration of oyster reefs in 10 Bay tributaries. 

“At least the bill rejects the Trump administration’s senseless proposal to end funding environmental education. But that’s not enough to salvage it.  

“We urge House members to reject this bill and call on congressional leaders to adopt the Senate Appropriations Committee’s more responsible funding numbers in the final NOAA budget instead.” 

Pennsylvania’s Susquehanna River a Bright Spot

While there is slightly less pollution flowing into the Chesapeake Bay from major rivers in recent years, water quality in the Bay has remained steady, according to an analysis released yesterday by the EPA’s Chesapeake Bay Program.  

The analysis compared both data from monitoring stations along major rivers that flow into the Bay, as well as the results of computer modeling of pollution trends. It also considered progress towards pollution reduction commitments the states are legally required to meet under the Chesapeake Clean Water Blueprint, which aims to stem nitrogen, sediment, and phosphorus pollution.  

The analysis shows lackluster progress as state and federal leaders around the region update the major agreement guiding Chesapeake Bay restoration. Last December, Bay restoration partners committed to revising the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement by the end of 2025. These partners have worked toward a more effective agreement in recent months. But the draft agreement still falls short.  

This month the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) submitted feedback on the draft agreement. CBF is urging leaders from states across the region to commit to a strong Bay Agreement that applies the latest science, implements innovative environmental and economic strategies, and increases accountability. The agreement must: 

• Set one uniform deadline of 2035 across all goals to provide accountability, with regular check-ins every two years; 
• Clearly define targets, including for conserving plants and animals, habitat restoration, and pollution reduction; 
• Ensure that pollution reduction targets are tied to water quality improvements that are directly measured, rather than modeled. Additional water quality monitoring stations will be vital to this; 
• Address challenges from climate change across the agreement; and, 
• Affirm commitments to meeting the pollution reductions the federal government and states are legally required to meet under the Clean Water Act, despite missing the 2025 deadline. 

In a bright spot, according to the latest analysis water quality monitoring shows that conditions in the Susquehanna River are improving across all indicators. This is notable because about half of the Chesapeake Bay’s fresh water comes from the Susquehanna. Improving conditions in Pennsylvania is vital to a healthier Bay.  

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

“While it is encouraging to see some progress, efforts to reduce pollution to the Bay are moving far too slowly. At the current rate, it would take 350 years to fully attain clean water standards for the Chesapeake Bay.   

“All states across the region must commit to a strong Chesapeake Bay agreement this year thatreaffirms commitments to pollution reductions the federal government and states are legally required to meet under the Clean Water Act.  

“The Bay Program’s recent analysis underscores the importance of long-term water quality monitoring stations to paint an accurate picture in real-time of the health of the Bay. The new agreement should commit to tying targets to cleaner water that is directly measured, not just modeled by a computer.  

“The improvements in the Susquehanna River demonstrate that renewed efforts in Pennsylvania are working to reduce pollution. Leadership in Pennsylvania and across the region can turn the tide.  

“Pollution doesn’t respect state lines. That’s why everyone must work together to see real progress. Now is not the time to step back, but to dig in and build on the foundation laid so far.” 

New MDOT State Highway Administration stormwater permit does not adequately address climate change, experts say

Maryland has missed a critical opportunity to reduce stormwater pollution running off the state’s highways, roads, and bridges and into local waterways, according to experts from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF), Chesapeake Legal Alliance (CLA), and Maryland League of Conservation Voters (LCV). A new precedent-setting permit misses the mark on addressing climate change at the same time that Marylanders are enduring exceptionally heavy rainfall and flash flooding this summer.

This week, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) issued an updated Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit to the Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) State Highway Administration (SHA). This five-year permit is designed to mitigate the harmful effects of oil, gas, toxins, and other pollutants that run off of roadways and into the Chesapeake Bay when it rains—otherwise known as stormwater pollution. Research has long shown that stormwater runoff from roads contain higher concentrations of pollutants than almost any other sources.

The renewal of SHA’s MS4 permit—which only occurs every five years—was a critical opportunity. SHA’s permit covers an immense scale of surface area, including nearly 15,000 lane miles and roughly 2,600 bridges. Maryland’s section of the Capital Beltway (I-495) and Baltimore Beltway (I-695) alone see volumes of over 220,000 vehicles per day, according to MDOT data.  

On average, Maryland is seeing more intense storms and flooding. Maryland received 7.81 inches of rainfall in May—the highest in the past 131 years—according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. A study commissioned by Pew Charitable Trusts estimated that inadequate stormwater management contributed to roadway flooding that cost Maryland more than $230 million between 2006 and 2020. An estimated 480,000 drivers are impacted by roadway flooding annually.

Yet in many cases, Maryland’s MS4 permits have not kept pace with climate change and have fallen short for water quality improvements. The permit fails to address significant deficiencies that were identified by experts in the draft permit last year, including continued use of out-of-date data, emphasis on stormwater practices that do not address the root cause of pollution, and lack of information on emerging contaminants like per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

Stormwater pollution is the fastest growing source of pollution in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s latest two-year progress report. While other pollution sources like agriculture have trended down in recent years, stormwater pollution has only increased. This is likely due to rapid development in the region, as well as more extreme weather and heavier rainfall from climate change. 

Polluted runoff doesn’t only harm waterways, but people too. Urban and suburban communities are enduring repeated flooding, property damage, and exposure to harmful chemicals. It is often underserved and overburdened communities that bear the brunt of stormwater damage due to a long history of discriminatory disinvestments in infrastructure. Research has consistently shown that Baltimoreans feel more vulnerable to climate impacts than most other communities in the U.S. 

MDE’s latest MS4 permit for MDOT SHA makes some minor improvements but fails to incorporate key provisions that advocates and citizens had called for during the permit’s public comment period. Suggested improvements that will not be implemented include: 

• Ensuring the permit accounts for increased storm intensity and other impacts of climate change;
• Requiring a range of effective practices to mitigate stormwater pollution, such as riparian plantings, “green infrastructure” infiltration structures, and removal of unused impervious surfaces (such as roads, parking lots, etc.), to reduce reliance on in-stream projects;
• Expanding monitoring requirements to include temperature changes and impacts to wildlife and their habitats from polluted runoff; and, 
• Tracking and addressing pollutants like polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and ‘forever chemicals’ such as PFAS.

CBF, CLA, and LCV are disappointed with MDOT SHA’s final permit, but will continue urging MDE to reduce stormwater pollution whenever and wherever possible.

CBF Maryland Executive Director Allison Colden issued the following statement:

“Maryland’s current stormwater regulations are no match for nightly thunderstorms and daily floods. We are disappointed the State did not capitalize on this opportunity to lead by example and demand effective stormwater improvements with tangible benefits. Because of this, one of Maryland’s largest pollution-reducing permits will not adequately reflect current climate impacts for at least another five years. 

“The health and safety of Marylanders and the vitality of our economy cannot wait. We urge MDE and Governor Moore’s Administration to take additional actions to meet Maryland’s stormwater challenges and set an example for other jurisdictions in the Bay region.” 

Maryland LCV Executive Director Kim Coble issued the following statement:

“Maryland should be leading the efforts to restore and protect the health of the Chesapeake Bay, starting with an effective and equitable stormwater management permit. Unfortunately, this permit takes a minimalistic approach that fails to prioritize projects addressing climate resilience and water quality in communities most burdened by pollution. We cannot afford to continue doing the bare minimum while frontline communities bear the brunt of environmental degradation. Stronger, more inclusive action is urgently needed.”  

CLA Senior Attorney Evan Isaacson issued the following statement:

“On its face, this permit is not strong enough to help protect communities and streams from highly polluted roadway runoff and will not do enough to meet our Bay goals. However, we know from several decades of experience that what matters more than the contents of a permit is how it is implemented. Maryland has an opportunity to change how it spends its scarce resources and invest in the most effective and efficient stormwater and flood risk projects. The good news is that some of the very cheapest means of protecting our water and safeguarding Marylanders from storm-induced flooding are also some of the most effective, notably planting trees near roadways and along streams, and restoring wetlands in flood prone areas.”

Renaming honors Frank and Jane Batten’s philanthropic legacy

Virginia Wesleyan University (VWU) will be renamed Batten University, university officials announced August 20. The renaming is aimed at honoring Frank and Jane Batten’s philanthropic legacy.  

Located near the mouth of the Bay, Virginia Wesleyan University has emphasized expanding environmental education within the watershed. VWU uses the waterways around Hampton Roads as living classrooms.  

For example, students across disciplines conduct fieldwork on the Ocean Explorer, a 45-foot research vessel jointly owned by VWU and the Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center. Onboard the boat they collect data on marine organisms, collect and test water samples, and undertake other research.  

Over the years, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) has worked with VWU on a number of initiatives, including scientific data collection, oyster restoration, and invasive species removal. CBF has also partnered closely with VWU on environmental education efforts including teacher training and summer programs for underserved youth. 

Chesapeake Bay Foundation President and CEO Hilary Harp Falk issued the following statement:  

“We’re celebrating the renaming of Virginia Wesleyan University to Batten University, honoring the incredible legacy of Frank and Jane Batten. Their visionary leadership and commitment to the environment and education have been transformational.  

“Jane Batten is passionate about building the next generation of leaders working toward solutions to climate change. The Batten family’s philanthropy to CBF, VWU and others has made the Hampton Roads area a center for environmental literacy in the state and the region.  

“Jane Batten’s dedication to protecting the Chesapeake Bay is unparalleled. Her generous support has helped inspire thousands of students to become lifelong advocates for clean water. The Batten family’s impact extends far beyond philanthropy; they are true partners in efforts to save the Bay. We are grateful for the Batten Family’s ongoing legacy.” 

To address growing warning signs around the Chesapeake Bay, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s (ASMFC) Menhaden Management Board voted 14 to 2 in favor of further refining specific management changes to Virginia’s industrial reduction fishery in the Bay. Virginia and New Jersey were the only states to oppose the action.  

While advocates had hoped for more immediate action this week by the ASMFC, the new options for the menhaden fishery are now expected to be presented at ASMFC’s Winter 2026 meeting.   

Menhaden are a small, nutrient-rich fish that is a key food for osprey, striped bass, whales, and many other larger animals. A major industrial menhaden fishery based in Virginia, known as a reduction fishery, harvests more than 100 million pounds of menhaden from the Bay each year.  

The vote comes after a group of 12 conservation and angling organizations last week urged the ASMFC to take action on menhaden. In addition, numerous citizens have raised their voices about menhaden in the Bay and the many species that depend on them for food.  

The Bay is showing red flags linked to menhaden, including precipitously declining commercial menhaden catch rates in Maryland and Virginia from smaller bait fisheries and young of the year osprey starving in their nests in portions of the Chesapeake Bay. Nearly one year ago, the Menhaden Management Board voted to establish a work group to address these ongoing ecological warning signs in the Chesapeake Bay.  

The ASMFC’s Chesapeake Bay Precautionary Management work group presented its report in May. It showed industrial menhaden fishing effort increasing in the summer in recent years in the Chesapeake, while Maryland menhaden catches declined. This new timing of intense fishing pressure may be contributing to the problems facing the Chesapeake Bay.    

This week’s action requires the Commission to form a Plan Development Team that would provide the board with options to distribute reduction fishing effort throughout the season. This would mitigate broader ecosystem concerns and impacts to Maryland’s smaller menhaden bait fishery.  

Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) Virginia Executive Director Chris Moore released the following statement: 

“There are clear signs of peril in the Chesapeake, and menhaden are one of the connecting threads. It’s been a year since the Commission first took notice of these concerns, yet any potential for further action has been delayed again.”  

“The Chesapeake’s fisheries and predators can’t wait. Menhaden are key to a thriving Chesapeake Bay, and a healthy, productive Chesapeake is vital to the entire Atlantic coast.  We appreciate the efforts of those on the ASMFC menhaden management board who have worked to keep this important issue at the forefront.”  

“One foreign-owned company consistently prevents progress in Virginia, and now coastwide at the ASMFC. While it’s encouraging that the ASMFC will continue working on this important issue over the coming months, the Chesapeake Bay is running out of time.”  

Plan Could Bring New Limits for Anglers, Public Urged to Support Conservation

Aiming to rebuild the struggling striped bass population, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) yesterday released a proposed update to the striped bass fishery plan for public comment.  

The update, known as Addendum III, includes various options that could lead to new regulations for anglers and watermen. Following a public comment period on those options, final adoption of any new measures is expected at the ASMFC’s annual meeting in late October.  

Striped bass recruitment, or reproductive success, in Maryland has been below average for six consecutive years. There are not enough young striped bass to grow up and replace the big fish being caught, foreshadowing a potential future disaster. The Chesapeake Bay produces between 70 to 90 percent of all striped bass on the East Coast, and low striped bass recruitment is also occurring in other nursery areas such as the Hudson and Delaware rivers.  

Challenges contributing to these striped bass struggles include pollution, loss of habitat, overfishing, invasive predators like blue catfish, and warming water temperatures due to climate change. Chesapeake Bay states have proactively closed fishing for striped bass during the hot summer months, when fish are most vulnerable to dying after being caught and released.  

But the ASMFC’s 2024 striped bass stock assessment showed that without additional action by ASMFC member states it’s unlikely that striped bass recover to their target numbers by 2029 due to higher than predicted fishing rates in 2024. The striped bass addendum issued this week includes several options intended to further reduce fishing effort to help striped bass rebound to the target by 2029.  

Over the coming months, ASMFC will host public hearings on Draft Addendum III, where participation will be critical to support striped bass conservation. The Chesapeake Bay Foundation is reviewing changes to the document and will share further information ahead of public hearings and public comment deadlines.  

CBF Maryland Executive Director Allison Colden issued the following statement.   

“Maryland’s striped bass surveys have made it clear – we’re facing a looming disaster. Without action now, the Chesapeake Bay won’t have a striped bass fishery in the future. Additional regulations will have real impacts, but they pale in comparison to the threat of continued striped bass decline.  ASMFC must err on the side of conservation to protect striped bass.” 

CBF Virginia Executive Director Chris Moore issued the following statement.   

“Striped bass are a Chesapeake Bay icon, but they’re facing a variety of challenges. With climate change and invasive blue catfish on the rise and numerous conservation measures having already been adopted, the options that fisheries managers have are becoming more limited. Given the importance of a healthy striped bass population in the Chesapeake Bay, we urge ASMFC to adopt strong conservation measures in Amendment III in order to help rebuild the striped bass population.” 

Rejecting the Trump administration’s deep budget cuts, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved a fiscal year 2026 spending bill yesterday that would continue funding key Bay restoration work at EPA and Interior Department at current levels. The vote was 26-2.

With the House panel approving the same amounts earlier this week, EPA’s Chesapeake Bay Program and Interior grants for habitat restoration and historic preservation cleared the first hurdle of Congress’s annual budgeting process without sustaining any cuts. 

But the agencies fared worse overall in the House committee bill, which would cut EPA’s total budget 23 percent, cut funds that help municipalities upgrade sewage treatment plants by 26 percent and lock in the administration’s sweeping staff reductions. The House committee bill also includes a host of policy riders that lack bipartisan backing.  

The White House wanted to zero out funding for the two Interior Department grant programs the Fish and Wildlife Service-run Chesapeake WILD program and the National Park Service’s Chesapeake Gateways and Watertrails. Instead, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees would keep their funding steady next year at $8 million and $3 million, respectively. 

The administration also wanted to eliminate funding for vital U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) research and monitoring in the region. The House Appropriations Committee broke with the administration and would continue funding the work at $17.6 million in fiscal 2026. 

The Senate panel did not specify a funding level for USGS’s Bay work, instead increasing the overall budget for the USGS ecosystem research. USGS’s Bay activities are primarily funded through this account. 

The EPA Chesapeake Bay Program leads the partnership of multiple federal agencies, the six Bay states, and the District of Columbia involved in cleaning up the Bay and its local rivers and streams. 

Both bills could still be amended when the full House and Senate consider them on the floor later this year. Floor votes have not yet been scheduled for either bill. 

Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) Senior Policy Director Keisha Sedlacek issued the following statement.  

“It’s a testament to the longstanding bipartisanship behind Bay restoration that EPA and Interior Department programs directly benefiting the Bay region cleared the House and Senate Appropriations Committees with their current funding unchanged.  

“But these bills, and bills that fund essential Bay-related work by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, are far from finished. We must remain vigilant and ready to act until the fiscal 2026 spending bills become law. Now is not the time to backtrack on clean water promises. Together, we are making progress toward saving the Bay. 

“CBF appreciates the hard work of Senate Appropriations Committee Bay champions Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), along with that of Interior-Environment Subcommittee Chair Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Subcommittee Ranking Member Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), full committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine), and full committee Vice Chair Patty Murray (D-Wash.).” 

The Chesapeake Bay Program today announced the expected completion of one of the Bay’s most successful recovery efforts to date: fully restoring oyster habitat in 10 tributaries in Maryland and Virginia by 2025. 

This announcement comes as partners prepare to plant the final few acres of oyster reef in the last targeted tributary—the Manokin River on Maryland’s Eastern Shore. Other tributaries already fully restored in Maryland include Harris Creek, the Little Choptank, Tred Avon, and St. Mary’s rivers, and in Virginia the Lafayette, Piankatank, Great Wicomico, Lynnhaven, Lower York, and Eastern Branch of the Elizabeth rivers.  

The Eastern Branch of the Elizabeth River is considered Virginia’s sixth ‘bonus’ tributary, bringing the total to 11 rivers restored, exceeding the initial goal. At more than 2,200 acres of habitat restored, this effort is considered the largest oyster restoration initiative in the world, drawing practitioners from across the globe to learn from oyster recovery efforts in Chesapeake Bay. Additionally, the vast majority of reefs are meeting or greatly exceeding goals for oyster abundance. 

Oysters are the bedrock of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem, naturally filtering the water and providing habitat for hundreds of other species. The goal to fully restore oyster habitat in these tributaries was first included in the 2014 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement—the joint federal and state plan to restore the Bay. As we approach the current Bay Agreement’s 2025 deadline, the Bay partnership is updating the agreement to look toward the future, including setting new goals for large scale oyster restoration. 

Recognizing the incredible success of this effort and need for continued momentum, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) urges partners to accelerate the scale and pace of oyster restoration. Specifically, CBF believes that we can restore an additional 2,400 acres of oyster sanctuary reef by 2035. The current draft agreement calls for 1,800 additional acres of oyster reef habitat, with no specified deadline. 

The Bay Program is currently accepting public comments through September 1 on the updated Bay Agreement draft. CBF will be calling for more clearly defined targets, including for habitat restoration and pollution reduction, and for the agreement to set a uniform 2035 deadline across all goals for stronger accountability. People who live in the Bay watershed, care about its health, and want continued investment in oyster restoration should make their voices heard here. 

CBF Maryland Executive Director, Allison Colden, issued the following statement: 

“Large scale oyster restoration is working. In Maryland alone, the oyster population has tripled since 2005. And Maryland’s Department of Natural Resources has already started its work toward the next goal, by committing to restore three additional oyster sanctuaries in the state. Because of the momentum and proven success behind this work, restoring an additional 2,400 acres of oyster habitat by 2035 is an ambitious, yet attainable, goal.” 

CBF Virginia Executive Director, Chris Moore, issued the following statement: 

“This oyster restoration success is a testament to years of dedicated work, scientific innovation, resource allocation, and unwavering partnership. The Chesapeake Bay is proud to be home to one of the most successful examples of oyster restoration in the world. Now it’s time to keep the momentum going, not only for the health of our waterways but for the health of people, other species, and local economies.” 

CBF Senior Policy Director Keisha Sedlacek issued the following statement: 

“Exceeding the oyster restoration goals in the current Bay Agreement is a testament to the power of the federal/state partnership and following a shared plan to save the Bay. To build on that success, it is critical that the next Bay Agreement include clearly defined targets for every goal—from water quality to oyster restoration—with a hard deadline of 2035. It must also recognize the impact climate change will have on how and where we do our work. With the revised agreement, we can lay out an ambitious plan that will deliver on the promise of clean water for the Bay, the people who love it, and future generations.” 

The House Appropriations Committee would continue funding key Bay restoration programs at EPA and the Department of the Interior at current levels in the fiscal year 2026 spending plan it approved today, 33-28. 

The panel rejected President Trump’s push to eliminate critical grant programs the Bay states rely on to reduce polluted runoff and run their state clean water programs. While it did not slash funds to modernize wastewater treatment plants as deeply as the administration called for, it would cut program funding deeply, from $1.64 billion this year to $1.2 billion in fiscal 2026. 

The House Appropriations Committee did follow the administration’s recommendation to direct $92 million to EPA’s Chesapeake Bay Program. Funding for the Bay Program, which leads the multi-agency, multi-state cleanup effort, has held steady at $92 million in the last three budget cycles. 

Roughly two-thirds of the Bay Program’s annual budget goes to state and local governments, universities, and local conservation groups to fund everything from monitoring water pollution to restoring eroded stream banks and rebuilding populations of native brook trout. 

At the Interior Department, the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) work in the Bay watershed would be flat funded at nearly $17.5 million again next year. The Trump budget request would wipe out funding for all USGS ecosystems research and monitoring activities, including in the Bay and its rivers and streams.

The committee also used the report on the bill to express support for USGS’s “watershed-wide research, assessment, monitoring, and modeling that help the Chesapeake Bay partners make informed management decisions to restore and protect the Chesapeake Bay and its watershed.” 

USGS provides the Bay states and other restoration partners with unbiased scientific information to help manage the watershed’s lands, waterways, fish, and wildlife.  

The House Appropriations Committee would also keep funding steady for the Chesapeake WILD grant program, at $8 million, and Chesapeake Gateways and Watertrails, at $3 million in fiscal 2026. The White House budget would not fund either one. 

Chesapeake WILD is run by Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service. It provides competitive grants for habitat restoration and conservation projects across the Bay region. Chesapeake Gateways and Watertrails, which the National Park Service administers, makes grants to local communities to showcase sites of historical, environmental, and cultural significance to the Bay and its waterways.   

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

“The broad, bipartisan support on Capitol Hill for restoring the Bay and its waterways stands in stark contrast to the devastating budget cuts and poison pill riders in the House Appropriations Committee bill. 

“The committee did reject the White House’s push to eliminate programs that help the states clean up the Bay and its waterways, restore wildlife habitat, and spotlight our region’s natural and historical treasures.  

“But this bill would still slash total EPA funding 23 percent, roll back bedrock clean air and water protections, and lock in the administration’s destabilizing mass layoffs and senseless reorganization plans. 

“It will be up to the Senate Appropriations Committee to address these glaring deficiencies and match, if not exceed, the Bay restoration funding levels in this bill when it takes up its version later this week.” 

Proposal Would Fund Oyster Restoration, Menhaden Science, and Environmental Education

The Senate Appropriations Committee defended essential Chesapeake Bay restoration and education programs from the Trump administration’s budget ax in the fiscal year 2026 spending plan for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) approved last week.

The Senate committee adopted the bill, which would fund the Department of Commerce, where NOAA is located, the Department of Justice, and federal science programs next year, by a vote of 19-10. It could advance to a vote on the Senate floor later this week. 

The bill would set NOAA’s fiscal 2026 budget at $6.1 billion. That’s a $200 million decrease from the agency’s current budget of $6.3 billion. But it’s more than $1.5 billion over the White House proposal to slash it down to $4.5 billion. 

While the White House called for eliminating funding for NOAA’s Chesapeake Bay Program Office and the rest of its habitat conservation and restoration work, the Senate Appropriations Committee would give the office another $1.5 million, on top of the existing $3 million, to restore the Bay’s oyster population. Oysters are a key driver of our seafood economy and clean water. 

NOAA’s Chesapeake Bay Office leads restoration work and conducts 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.  

The Senate committee also rejected the administration’s bid to zero out NOAA environmental education funds, including for regional programs like the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Education and Training program (Chesapeake B-WET). Instead, the bill would continue funding to help schools teach students about their local environment at $8.7 million in fiscal 2026. 

Notably, the committee recognized the need for more data about the population of menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay. Menhaden are a small, oily fish that is a critical food source for other fish, birds, and whales on the Atlantic Coast. It would provide at least $2.5 million for NOAA and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission to collect data on menhaden numbers in the Bay.  

Virginia is home to the only industrial menhaden fishery on the Atlantic coast. Lobbying by the menhaden reduction industry has repeatedly blocked state proposals to fund the research needed to properly protect menhaden’s important role in the food chain. 

Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) Senior Policy Director Keisha Sedlacek released the following statement: 

“NOAA is crucial to restoring the Bay and its waterways. NOAA programs support managing its valuable fisheries, enhancing our region’s resiliency, and educating the next generation of Bay stewards. The Senate Appropriations Committee rightly rejected the White House’s threat to eliminate support for a healthy Chesapeake Bay.

“Senators of both parties instead wisely recognized the value of continuing one of the largest and most successful oyster restoration efforts in the world and ensuring that students don’t lose the benefits of hands-on outdoor educational experiences in their local communities.

“The proposal to invest in menhaden research brings welcome federal focus to Virginia’s industrial menhaden fishery. CBF hopes it will spur Virginia to step up with additional funding to better manage this economically and ecologically valuable fishery. 

“NOAA is the most important funder of environmental education in our region. Chesapeake B-WET helps teachers and students learn outside on the Bay and our local rivers and streams, oftentimes providing the only chance students will have to practice science in the real world.  

“CBF thanks Sens. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.V.), Christopher Coons (D-Del.), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) for providing NOAA the funding it needs to keep its Bay restoration work moving forward in such a challenging fiscal environment. 

“We encourage the House Appropriations Committee to join their Senate counterparts in giving Bay restoration funding the priority it deserves in its legislation.”