November 23, 2024
Column

Regulations that serve no purpose

Maine’s rivers are indeed one of our most treasured natural resources. Once considered the backbone of industry and commerce, our rivers continue to sustain our economy and way of life, providing agricultural and municipal water supplies, sewer treatment capabilities, power for hydroelectric generation, transportation, industrial capacity and countless recreational opportunities.

Over the last 15 years we’ve seen tremendous improvements to water quality in the state. As a matter of fact, the Androscoggin and St. Croix are frequently cited as notable successes of the Clean Water Act – hosts today to outstanding bass fisheries, stocked salmon and trout, nesting eagles as well as significant investment along the rivers.

We must continue to be vigilant in protecting our rivers, all the while recognizing that legislated water- quality standards by necessity represent a careful management of competing interests. The livelihoods of thousands of Maine families are dependent on a sensible balance.

Last year, after much debate and considerable testimony by experts, the 121st Legislature overwhelmingly adopted a dissolved oxygen standard for Class C waters. The legislation in no way degrades or compromises the water quality of rivers such as the Androscoggin and St. Croix, but rather creates a standard where previously none existed. And contrary to what some claim, the standard actually improves water quality on the rivers.

The new standard has one purpose – to promote the growth of cold-water fish such as trout and salmon. It requires that dissolved oxygen levels be at least 6.5 parts per million whenever the water temperature is 71.6 degrees Fahrenheit (22 degrees Celsius) or less. That threshold was chosen because scientific data indicates that trout and salmon are not present and do not grow at higher temperatures. The law also created an exception on river segments for which the Department of Environmental Protection had already issued licenses or had conducted modeling using the higher temperature threshold of 75.2 Fahrenheit (24 Celsius) because federal regulations prohibit “backsliding” or easing of established standards.

The standard set by the 121st Legislature was well within the range of recommended dissolved oxygen and temperature criteria established by the Environmental Protection Agency. In fact, the EPA’s Gold Book standard for dissolved oxygen of 6.5 parts per million would allow a less stringent standard to be set at 68 degrees Fahrenheit (20 degrees Celsius), but the Legislature decided to enact a more stringent standard for Maine.

Again, the dissolved oxygen standard was an effort to protect cold-water fish such as trout and salmon. Scientific research and the good sense of fisherman corroborate the fact that in shallow, warm rivers like the Androscoggin and portions of the

St. Croix cold-water fish seek

refuge long before the temperature reaches 75 degrees.

The bill that Rep. Elaine Makas has submitted seeks to overturn the thoughtful efforts of the 121st Legislature, the Maine DEP, stakeholders and countless others to set a dissolved oxygen standard based on good science that provides significant environmental safeguards and maintains a suitable balance of uses.

LD 99 increases the temperature threshold to 75.2 degrees Fahrenheit (24 degrees Celsius) or the ambient temperature of the water body, whichever is lower. Yet the reality is that cold-water fish avoid those temperatures by moving to tributaries or springs. If refuge is not available, these species go into a survival mode, altering behavior to conserve energy. They do not feed and

they do not grow.

The proposed legislation will impose enormous costs on a number of Maine paper mills and municipalities while providing no tangible

environmental benefits.

Maine has lost more than 17,000 manufacturing jobs in the last three years. At a time when mills are closing and thousands of jobs are being lost, it’s just bad policy to mandate new environmental regulations that serve no real purpose.

This commentary was written by state Sens. John Martin and Joseph Perry,

and state Rep. Anne Perry.


Have feedback? Want to know more? Send us ideas for follow-up stories.

comments for this post are closed

You may also like