Deadline Pushed Back for Decision on Wetlands Destruction

Today (June 1) was supposed to be the deadline for the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) to make a decision on whether to grant a permit to allow the destruction of wetlands in Southern Maryland so that Charles County could build a highway across Mattawoman Creek, an important fish breeding ground.

But MDE said this afternoon that it is granting a six month extension, until December 1, 2009, for the decision on the Charles County Cross County Connector road project.

It’s good that the MDE is looking long and hard at into this ill-advised highway project, which could spark sprawl development and the construction of more than 1,100 homes in largely wooded area and contribute polluted runoff into the creek.  But perhaps it’s time for the state just to say no.  More blacktop would only mean more oil, sediment and nitrogen pollution being flushed by rain into a fragile waterway, and that would mean less life for the Chesapeake Bay.

The Maryland Department of Natural Resources has called Mattawoman Creek "the best, most productive tributary in the bay." Dozens of fish species, including yellow perch and largemouth bass, breed in the stream. The conservation group American Rivers in April listed Mattawoman Creek as one of the country’s “most endangered” waterways

On January 21, MDE wrote to Charles County that “the construction of the Cross County Connector will certainly lead to additional impacts and further compromise the Mattawoman watershed and its living resources.”

The state agency told the county to provide an analysis of the “combined effects of the roadway and past, present and future development activities” that will grow from the highway.

As of May 21, the county had not provided this information to MDE to allow the state to make its decision on whether to permit to destroy seven acres of wetlands for the highway, according to a letter from MDE to Charles County.  So MDE concluded it would be impossible to make a decision by June 1, the letter states.

The MDE granted an earlier six-month extension in January.

(Photo courtesy of Mattawoman Watershed Society)

 

Comments

[Mike]

Well written article. Very usefull in helping me keep up to date with this issue.

[John Page Williams]

Tom, this (second) extension bothers me. If Charles County can't produce the requested information, MDE should go on and make the decision to deny the permit for the road.

In talking with Indian Head residents, I hear the attitude that "We can build the road and completely mitigate its impact on Mattawoman Creek with restoration projects." The question is whether any of them truly understand how ecologically complex a forested creek/floodplain system is. I'm not convinced that there is ANY combination of mitigation/restoration techniques that can truly protect the Creek's natural resources, INCLUDING those resources that contribute so strongly to tourism in Charles County. Proponents of the road can speak of "balance," but Mattawoman Creek is already on the edge of water quality compromise because of the acreage of impervious surfaces in its watershed.

I strongly believe in forested buffer restoration when done according to scientifically-accepted best practices, but I believe even more strongly that in the case of Mattawoman Creek and the proposed Charles County Connector, Protection trumps Restoration.

Best regards, John Page Williams
CBF Senior Naturalist

[linda redding]

Recently President Obama announced his commitment to protecting the Chesapeake Bay. Governor O'Malley, Senator Middleton, Delegate Murray Levy have all strongly stated their commitment to protecting the Chesapeake Bay. Here we have Mattawoman Creek, "the most productive tributary of the Chesapeake Bay", the POSTER CHILD for the Bay. It's time for the polititians to stop being politicians for just once, put their money where their mouth is, and demonstrate true leadership by denying permits that will promote sprawl and deforestation. Everyone who is aware and ACCEPTS SCIENCE knows that this highway is an unpopular, expensive, obsolete idea that is nothing more than a subsidy for developers. It would actually result in higher taxes not only to pay for the highway but also by destroying natural resources which provide services to us for free. Charles County should move into the 21st century by making light rail and transit oriented development their first priority and stop planning the destruction of critical, funtioning, irreplacable, green infrastructure. The people at MDE, ACOE, and EPA understand that they need to deny the permits in order to protect Mattawoman Creek and the Chesapeake Bay. Are our elected officials smart enough to let them do that?

[Bonnie Bick]

The question before MDE and the US ACOE on whether or NOT to permit the Charles County proposed Cross County Connector
could not be here at a more opportune moment. Everyone is asking the question ... can we save the Bay? Mattawoman Creek is the perfect poster child that will bring us the answer to that question.

Mattawoman Creek is one of the Chesapeake Bay region's most fertile fish spawning habitats. Mattawoman Creek has major green infrastructure forest hubs and valuable wetlands that are presently protecting the water quality of the creek. If the new four-lane highway were permitted the wetlands and forests would be lost and fragmented.

The regulators, with eyes wide open can not approve the Cross County Connector when it is absolutely clear that the highway would increase the nutrients in Mattawoman Creek? EPA said Mattawoman Creek needs a 40 % reduction in nutrients when in 1996 they placed Mattawoman on the federal dirty waters list. http://www.epa.gov/reg3wapd/tmdl/MD_TMDLs/Mattawoman/Mattawoman_DR.pdf .

The future of Mattawoman Creek, the Bay and the viability of the living resources of each, lie in the balance.