Barbershop Clip #1 Barberhsop clip #1 (153)

Barbershop Clip #2 Barbershop clip #2 (154)

Barbershop Clip #3 Barbershop clip #3 (165)

Aging and poorly designed sewage and stormwater systems hold much of the blame for beachwater pollution. Even in the relatively dry 2008 beach season, stormwater runoff contributed to two-thirds of the closing/advisory days in which a contamination source was reported. Unknown sources of pollution caused nearly 13,000 closing and advisory days. To read the entire report visit the NRDC web site: http://www.nrdc.org/water/oceans/ttw/titinx.asp

The Maryland portion of the report can be downloaded here:Annual Beach Report (149)

To hear the entire broadcast, the following three files are provided courtesy of WAMU (88.5FM) you can also visit the WAMU web site (www.WAMU.org) for more information about program offerings and for additional audio content:

Kojo Show Clip #1  Kojo #1 (162)
Kojo Show Clip #2 Kojo 2 (166)
Kojo Show Clip #3 Kojo #2 (158)

The University of Maryland Center for Environmental Studies has posted their onw Sojourn Blog: 

http://ian.umces.edu/blog/2009/06/23/paddling-the-patuxent-river/

Stay tuned to this post for the daily “feed” of information:

Kayakers lost on the river? Friday 19th (Day One on the Pax Sojourn).
Well if it is on the news it must be so? People have been calling us all day asking if it is true what they saw on the news. That several kayakers had to be rescued off the river because the waters were too fierce and the current so strong that it took several fire engines three helicopters and a couple of EMS boats to save them. You can’t make this stuff up? Or can you?

It was like this. After a few days of afternoon rainsqualls, the Sojourners awoke on Friday morning ready to greet a bright new day on the river. They had their yogurt and bagels with cantaloupe and watermelon. They did their morning stretching as the morning fog rolled off the river and the rosy sunlight gave way to a hint of the ferocious summer heat to come. As we launched kayakers into the flooded Patuxent things looked bright for a day of fun on the river. The main channel looked brisk but not scary and the

Sojourners suiting up for a day on the river on Day #1

brown current seemed placid at the launch while paddlers haggled over which boat and which paddle was theirs and how many granola bars to cram into their pockets for the day ahead. But as people turned the bend downriver we began to get radio reports that the current was picked up velocity as the river twisted from our view. Soon there were reports that some paddlers had already flipped their boats and that what looked placid within our limited view shed quickly became a good deal more turbulent a little further downriver. The head guide gave orders to those of us at the launch to cease launching people to avoid creating a heavier demand on the downstream guides who were busily securing the people assigned to them and confronting the apparency that the downstream areas were a lot more challenging than we had known. In rapid fire the order was passed via radio to abort the day’s journey and to get the people on boats to land in order to avoid having the current and condition disperse people further down the river making it harder for the guides to keep up with the need to monitor and account for everyone. The order was then passed for people on both the left and right banks to consolidate into groups and try and make their way back up river to the original launch point. All quickly reported back via radio that everyone was safe and accounted for and that some of the groups having tied up their boats to lands, also inadvertently found themselves in terrain that was steep, and overgrown that they could not easily find their way upriver via land. The suggestion was made to order a boat pick up from park authorities. But when their boat turned out to be unavailable, a call was then placed the State DNR and then ultimately the state police. The idea was to pick up the dispersed paddlers by water so they would not have to try and fight their way upstream in the rapid current or fight briars and unknown terrain on land. Know this, at no time was anyone lost, in danger or unaccounted for. People were on the bank not because the current marooned them there, but because they followed instructions. At no time did anybody lose radio contact with the guides or eye contact their fellow paddlers. At all times people were under competent watchful eyes of others familiar with the river and using safety protocols. The actual problem was the flora and fauna on the banks- and not the unruly surf. The later media coverage ignored and misunderstood these facts. The parties on the river were separated by no more than one-quarter mile and each were facing slighting different obstacles on land that made it impractical for them to simply walk the ½ mile or so back up river. By the time the newsmakers got word on their scanners there were at least three helicopters in the air a fleet of fire engines and EMS vehicle and police officials from at least three different

EMS Rescue Craft on site

jurisdictions. Before long the cell phone calls from parents, well wishers and others poured in. Were sojourners drowning or fighting for their lives on the river? Hardly. The tide of TV cameras turned out to be far tougher than the tide in the river. As the plucky paddlers drifted back to that morning’s campsite in groups, and were shuttled up the parking lot by anxious rescue officials, a hastily improvised command center, a recovery/treatment area behind yellow police tape at Patuxent 4-H there were greeted by a phalanx of TV cameras crowding so close they could barely squeeze off the bus! Microphones thrust in their faces by a gauntlet of press demanding interviews and sound bytes. How did it feel to nearly die? Are you happy to be rescued? Suddenly police demanded the minors be isolated in a controlled area, and sequestered to ensure that all were accounted for and that they were protected from the TV crews. As kids were sequestered inside a nearby ambulance parents demanded to see their children only to be rebuffed by the zealous rescue officials applying their rescue training. In the ensuing chaos visitors to the center were subjected to ID checks and then…more fire engines and ambulances arrived as the responders did not yet have enough information about whether there were others on the river. Those who came only for a nice day floating on the river and instead found themselves in the middle of a headline news story where their every utterance in front of the camera suddenly became rumor, quotable, significant… errrh newsworthy. An event that was nothing more than a success story about safe boating and safety training working as it should, (and a last minute itinerary change) suddenly became the fodder du jour for breaking news on CNN, WTOP, WJLA and others. One parent was heard to utter (in response to a comment about the day’s event); that the real news story was that the flooded waters reeked of the smell of raw sewage, exhorting the press to cover that story instead of the invented one. The irony was that the sojourners and the public were at greater overall risk from bacteria in the water than from flooding and the so-called dangerous waters.
With a tip of our hats and deep appreciation to our diligent and highly professional “rescuers” we requested one boat and the responders in a well placed burst of zeal sent us virtually every responder in the vicinity accept the National Guard. It was an impressive and gratifying display. Our guides did their jobs, our paddlers did theirs and the emergency reponders performed admirably. The media: Missed the both the story and the significance! Worse, the media frenzy added to the confusion on site and hampered efforts by the event organizers and the responders to resolve. It was an irresponsible display by reporters who transformed a relatively simple matter into a “carnival” of innuendo, and trumped up drama.
Consider these facts:
1. Several times during the morning, kayak guides and Riverkeeper staff had difficulty using our command radios due to low flying news choppers buzzing us overhead.
2. Not one staff person from our office was ever interviewed, consulted or even approached by the media for details about the incident. Thus the cognizant people with specific knowledge and who were working directly with police and EMS to resolve the situation were never consulted for facts about how many paddlers, who was in the water or what the situation actually was. The news coverage was contrived and based on hearsay but limited or no actual research or fact finding. However, several paddlers and patrons were interviewed about their subjective experiences on camera. These people lacked a big picture perspective or even key facts about the event. At least one interviewee was erroneously attributed in the newspaper as a Riverkeeper “spokesperson”.
3. Police ultimately corralled the minors on scene to protect them from the media. So, resources that might have been allocated on site to resolve the situation were instead expended dealing with concerns about too much press.
4. Published media accounts of who may have been in jeopardy range from 7-32 depending on the sources. Uninformed accounts of this nature caused needless hysteria and were traumatic for families and others. Some on the Sojourn who considered this event to be of small significance in their overall itinerary were deeply traumatized by all the fuss, the aggressive reporting and media insistence that the events were far more serious than they actually were.
5. One news outlet published an account that calls to the Riverkeeper office went unanswered. But in fact we are unaware of any such calls, until returning to the Riverkeeper office at the conclusion of the trip. The only direct call we received from media inquiring about this event came from the Gazette newspapers who after hearing our explanation then declined to write a story about it.

6. One photo journalist who was asked by a Riverkeeper staff member to cease bothering the participants on the trip got into a shouting argument, insisting on his right to be there and adding his own belligerence to an already chaotic situation.
In our view the official responders behaved admirably, responded with incredible professionalism and were courteous at all times. The print and electronic media made the event far worse than it needed to be
As the group settled down for a picnic lunch behind police tape in a meadow next to the 4-H facility, yet another news organization began setting up for an evening news live shot. A non-event suddenly became “newsworthy” simply because the media did not understand that nobody had even been hurt or even rescued from danger. Under a walnut tree swaying in the gentle breeze and under sunny skies a plan was quickly formed by the paddlers to go retrieve the missing boats and by evening the entire group was eating good food on the hilltop of Mt. Calvert overlooking miles of lush foliage and riverside vistas… and then dancing to the sounds of two bands on the lawn of Mt. Calvert. As the as the strains of banjoes, fiddles, piano and drums faded like the sunset over a painted the Patuxent sky, people bedded down

Paddlers and well wishers at the concert

for a night under black cloudless canopy and all said goodnight to another memorable (and colorful) moment on the Patuxent Sojourn.

(Day #3) Saturday Paddle, restoration and exploration

(Day #4) Sunday Paddling

(Day #5) Monday Wrap-up

To view pictures of the Wade-In follow this link: (click here)

To hear MP3 audio files from some of the speakers at the June 14, 2009 event, you can click below.

Remarks by singer Tom Wisner: Wisner Remarks (167)

l-r; Governor Martin Malley, Tom Wisner, Bernie Fowler

Performance by singer Tom Wisner: Wisner Song (166)

Remarks by Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley: Omalley remarks (163)

Remarks by Senator Bernie Fowler: Fowler remarks (168)

The overall water quality health of the Patuxent River reveals no meaningful progress toward desirable water quality some 30 years after the State of Maryland embarked on efforts to clean up the river. This is confirmed by a report card released by the Patuxent Riverkeeper and the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science. This report card gives the health of the Patuxent River estuary a score of D- for 2008.

Water quality and biological data collected by state and federal agencies was analyzed to provide the second geographical look at the estuary’s health. Key findings were:

· The middle estuary scored the highest (46%), largely due to the increased aquatic grass cover and dissolved oxygen levels that more frequently met the target levels.

· While aquatic grass cover in the upper estuary had relatively high scores in the previous report card, this year saw a small but insufficient increase, which did not raise the overall score or compensate for the decrease in water clarity and phytoplankton community health.

· Water clarity was consistently poor throughout the estuary, reaching target levels at a frequency of zero to four percent.

· The lower estuary scored the lowest (19%), despite an increase in the overall health score from 2007, with all indicators scoring poorly relative to target levels.

To create a more comprehensive look at the entire watershed the Patuxent Riverkeeper, a four year-old non-profit organization of more than 400 citizens, conducted trainings throughout the watershed to equip citizen volunteers to test the Patuxent for temperature, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, nitrates, pH, phosphate, biochemical oxygen demand, and fecal coliform. Over fifty citizen volunteers began a long-term effort to monitor water quality in the Patuxent River, Maryland’s longest intrastate waterway, as part of the Patuxent Riverkeeper’s Water Quality Initiative. The information collected is posted on a website, www.pwqi.net, available for public viewing. The citizen testers found that nitrate and pH levels are higher in the northern half of the watershed while temperature was higher in the southern half. Turbidity levels were highest in the northern tidal section of the watershed.

“It’s necessary that citizens take leadership in monitoring water quality in the Patuxent. The persistent lack of progress in healing our waterway is making citizens cynical that there is genuine willpower to correct the problems. We plainly need to turn up the heat if we expect to have clean water again in this tributary,” said Fred Tutman, Patuxent Riverkeeper.

Patuxent Riverkeeper is seeking additional water quality monitor volunteers and will be providing additional training during 2009. Those testing water will be provided all the necessary equipment with instructions on their use. More information about volunteering can be obtained from Lauren Webster, Restoration Coordinator, 301-249-8200 x6.

Download audio clips from the Report Card press conference in MP3 format:

Fred Tutman, Patuxent Riverkeeper:

Dr. William Dennison, UMCES:

Dr. Margaret Palmer, Chesapeake Biological Labs: