Last December, the Maryland legislature approved a new $50 million “Chesapeake Bay 2010 Trust Fund†to help clean up the decades-dirty Bay. The “2010 Trust Fund†will provide money to help move the state closer to achieving water quality goals set back in 2000 by the 2010 deadline. Everyone has accepted these goals will not be achieved in time, but public trust in the state’s ability to even make a dent is waning.
This year, state officials have a chance to strengthen public confidence that they are actually doing everything they can to clean up the Bay by announcing they will spend the Fund using a “cost-effectiveness†principle. Though seemingly simple and straightforward, this common sense approach to spending the public’s money is a radical departure from the past when funds were largely distributed on a first-come, first-share basis.
Among the various options for reducing the nutrient pollution ailing the Bay, agricultural best management practices deliver the biggest bang for the nutrient-reduction buck. That means Maryland’s farm conservation programs should get most (if not all) of the Fund. But in order to truly have an impact, Maryland’s farm conservation programs should spend the fund in the most cost-effective way they can. Maryland’s agriculture, environment, and natural resource agencies should commit to following a three-step approach:
- Identify and prioritize the highest nutrient loading watersheds,
- Identify and prioritize the highest nutrient loading farmland locations within the priority watersheds,
- Identify and prioritize implementation of the most cost-effective and site-appropriate conservation practices.