Before you take a dip in a stream or river to cool off this summer, be aware that a conservation group is warning that virtually none of those freshwater bodies in the Bay region or nationwide is being adequately checked for bacterial and other contamination.
While officially designated swimming beaches generally get checked frequently for bacteria that could make people sick, a recent Izaak Walton League of America evaluation found that almost every state fails to thoroughly monitor river and stream water quality. Examining state reports to federal regulators, the league determined that only 2 percent of rivers and streams nationwide are being properly assessed.
Of the six states sharing the Bay watershed, the league found in its report, Clean Water: Your Right to Know, that only Delaware’s natural resources agencies do a good job of keeping tabs on river and stream water quality.
In fact, Delaware and Rhode Island, the nation’s smallest states, were the only ones that received an “A” rating for having sufficient monitoring of river and stream water quality. The league gave “F” grades to 46 states, including Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. Connecticut and Hawaii, the third and fourth smallest states by land mass, earned “Ds.”
The public health risks could be significant. According to the league’s evaluation of state reports to the Environmental Protection Agency, slightly more than half the water bodies tested did not meet Clean Water Act standards for swimming, fishing or drinking.
“The pollutants in these waterways are alarming — in many cases a laundry list of bacteria, carcinogens and nutrients,” the report states.
The EPA shares the blame for inadequate river and stream monitoring, according to the league.
“U.S. EPA actually encourages states to monitor randomly selected sites and use that information as an assessment of all the state’s rivers and streams,” the league report states.
Under EPA standards set in 2002, states must test every type of water body and maintain a water quality monitoring network capable of making “statistically valid inferences” about water quality in all water bodies.
An EPA spokeswoman explained that the states’ monitoring systems must provide 90 percent confidence, plus or minus 10 percent, that the limited number of water bodies checked accurately reflect the water quality status of all water bodies.
The league maintains that the only way to monitor water quality in all water bodies is to do just that.
The EPA said it didn’t mandate such a standard because very few state agencies have the budget or staff to perform the labor-intensive work of regularly testing every water body.
But far more water bodies could be monitored, the league contended, and at very low expense, if the states would team up with volunteers.
Most states are using volunteers for water quality monitoring to a degree, but the study found that Virginia is doing far more than any other state. Working with the the Izaak Walton League and other conservation groups, the state’s Department of Environmental Quality has more than doubled the number of sites where it monitors water quality, according to the report.
The league found that Virginia’s DEQ spends approximately $3 million each year at its 1,200 state-staffed and equipped monitoring stations, at a cost of about $2,500 per station. But the DEQ also provides $88,000 in grants to volunteer groups that train and equip volunteers to operate 1,500 additional monitoring stations—at a cost of about $60 per station, the league said.
“Virginia supports independent volunteer groups that educate, train, and equip volunteers to monitor streams and rivers for chemicals, bacteria, macroinvertebrates and aquatic invasive species,” according to the league. It gave Virginia the only “A” for volunteer engagement among the 50 states.
The next highest grade for volunteer engagement given to a Bay state was D+, a grade bestowed to Delaware, New York and Pennsylvania. Maryland received a D and West Virginia received an F, the same rating given to 17 other states nationwide.
Maryland’s Department of Natural Resources trains and equips volunteers to monitor streams and rivers. But according to the league, the DNR does not use citizen data in its biennial water quality reports to the EPA.
Moreover, the league contended that the DNR requires that volunteers provide an “unnecessary” level of biological detail when submitting macroinvertebrate data and requires that they submit chemical data to a lab for “cost-prohibitive and unnecessary” analysis. Those requirements can diminish volunteer interest, the league suggested.
A DNR spokeswoman said that the agency “appreciates the Izaak Walton League of America’s efforts and shared concern for our state’s water quality,” but added that the department “might not agree” with the the league’s low grade for its collaboration with volunteers.
Although the report mentions only the DNR, volunteers working on the report also scrutinized citizen engagement by the Maryland Department of the Environment, league executive director Scott Kovarovics said.
The MDE did not respond to a request for comment on the league rating but David Flores, the Baltimore Harbor Waterkeeper with Blue Water Baltimore, said he “has concerns” with the league’s low assessment of Maryland agency collaboration with volunteers.
Asked to respond, Kovarovics said it might well be that the MDE closely collaborates with Blue Water Baltimore. He said the league focused on agency collaboration with groups to monitor river and stream health statewide.