Home > Myrtle Point

Myrtle Point

It Is Time To “Walk The Talk”!

By Kellie Gofus....a resident of California, MD and a member of the Friends of Myrtle Point Park Board

St. Mary’s County citizens are surrounded by tidal waters. We note when crabs are running, fish are biting, and we eat oysters in months having the letter “r” in them. Whether for recreation, solace, pleasant views, or occupation, we appreciate and value these waters.  All of us live within a mile of a stream, creek, or river – which is one of the defining characteristics of our community identity and quality of life. This is also a key feature of our economic identity and assets; just delete all the businesses associated with water proximity – from marinas to the military – and we might as well be in Kansas. So why are we not more vested in protecting our assets today and ensuring their viability for a future quality of life? Why are agents of public trust and interest not more assertively making choices on behalf of these values?

Some woeful details bode ill for the Big Picture of our common connection to these waters. On Friday the 6th, I attended the Patuxent River Summit and listened to scientists, regulators, and advocates discuss the river’s status and options for improvement. The auditorium was packed. During an audience input segment, a man asked for any persons representing St. Mary’s County to raise their hand. Only two went up; one was our local State Senator. After the man observed, “Well, there’s half the river missing!!” the crowd erupted. I was appalled, embarrassed, and perturbed my county was conspicuously absent from a forum convened on behalf of redeeming this stressed river system. Numerous Calvert and Charles County representatives actively participated, some as panelists. Where were our commissioners, planners, or stewards of public trust?? Is the water quality along one of our two river shorelines not considered among our county assets? I suggest another interpretation of this paltry showing: if you are not part of the common solution, then you remain part of the problem.

Yet there are more mismatched rationales, especially between words and deeds.

The Saint Mary’s County Stormwater Management, Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance would seem to embrace high principles for watershed integrity, as noted in two purpose statements: “...to reduce the adverse affects of erosion and sediment deposits or other earthen materials on lands and within the watersheds of St. Mary’s County.”; and “Minimizing soil erosion and off-site sedimentation will minimize damage to public and private property; and assist in maintaining and enhancing water quality and protecting natural resources.” Sounds like quality business practices and noble cause would follow such objectives, yet the devil is in the details. Several official decisions/permits allow actions that compromise the very spirit of purpose claimed in the ordinance. Dismal results from these permitted actions reveal that the quality and vitality of county waters are also being compromised. Sediments filling wetlands and mud coursing through creeks seem to be acceptable outcomes of such compromises, despite what the law claims to intend.

Numerous county watersheds are similarly besieged; Mill Creek is a current case in point. Development grading on steep slopes exposes highly erodible soils, which flow in great volume down streams and into the adjacent wetlands and creek. Once an unspoiled watershed draining into the Patuxent at Myrtle Point, Mill Creek is chronically assaulted by these excessive sediments, resulting in “mocha latte” colored waters and silt accumulations that build ever-expanding mud flats. The Maryland Department of the Environment estimated over 600 cubic yards of soil entered the creek during a single, catastrophic erosion event last year. The entire 1^st floor of my home could not hold that volume, and each rain event just adds to it. Why did that extreme episode not invoke stricter compliance with laws intended to protect our waters? Why are loopholes allowed that dilute the ordinance into irrelevance, considering that extreme soils or slopes can consequently be “graded to fit”? It’s a sad day when the spirit and purpose of the law becomes moot, and nothing stands in the gap to reduce the adverse affects of sediment deposits within the watersheds of St. Mary’s County.

Prudent financial managers make quality choices that best serve their customers. Our county agents of public trust and interest need to make principled, economically intelligent, and legal choices on behalf of their true customers – all the citizens of St. Mary’s County. Only then will such quality choices confirm them as prudent managers of public assets.

On October 12^th, members of the Board of Appeals decided the ordinance crafted to protect our watersheds would not prevail over a permit to grade six development lots that clearly exceed legal limits. Despite acknowledging the decision outcome would neither serve the best interests of the citizens nor the watershed, they chose to perpetuate business as usual. This Mill Creek scenario had every potential to become a redeeming example of far-sighted asset management and legal compliance, and not just another case of short-term gains or acquiescence to well-funded pressures.

Regrettably the Board did not choose to fully serve their customers. The past poor results may prove to be prologue. I lament they did not take the higher ground on this issue, as this decision now stands on these soft soils and the chance for quality erodes into the creek again with the next rain.