Fred Tutman’s office’s backyard features a postcard-perfect view of his beloved Patuxent River. Clumps of brown spatterdock are turning tan, creating a lovely marshy look as the late afternoon sun dips. Boats glide through the channel, their captains waving as they pass. The first osprey of the year surges past the purple martin birdhouses on its dive for a fish.
But the longtime Patuxent Riverkeeper looks deeper and sees something disturbing: a continued assault on Maryland’s longest river — a waterbody that can’t speak for itself — from development and industry, as well as a history of injustices in which the wealthiest communities receive the best environmental protection.
For the last decade, Tutman, 56, has tried to speak for the river he knows so well — his family has owned a farm in Upper Marlboro since 1926. But it is not an easy job. He has angered industry, sparred with state officials and even broken ranks with fellow environmentalists. And it is a job that leaves him little time to himself between filing lawsuits, attending community meetings and speaking to legislators in Washington, DC, and Annapolis. He also teaches a law class at St. Mary’s College.
“This work demands so much of you that it will teach you who you are,” Tutman said. “And it’s not complete work if you’re not working for the whole community.”
Some environmentalists support compromises and seek to work with those accused of polluting, careful not to offend. Tutman speaks his mind, whether he’s addressing reporters, senators or funders.
That kind of forthrightness is increasingly rare in the environmental movement, said Scott Edwards, who worked with Tutman when Edwards was the attorney for the Waterkeeper Alliance.
“In the national environmental community, there’s a lack of fight going on. A lot of groups are more concerned with access and political deal-cutting and not angering people in power,” said Edwards, now of Food and Water Watch. “But we’re not here to make friends. We’re here to fight for what’s right, and I think Fred does a great job of that.”
For example, other watershed groups, including the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, have not taken a position on Dominion Resources’ plans to export natural gas at Cove Point, which sits on the Chesapeake Bay. Tutman, in contrast, has been demanding that the company share more information about its plans and excoriating politicians for offering tax breaks, zoning waivers and non-disclosure promises.
His most painful break with environmentalists came over nutrient trading. Two years ago, the Chesapeake Bay environmental community agreed it would not mount a legal challenge to the practice of creating a pollution credit exchange, which is a part of the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load. Environmental attorneys worried that a legal challenge to trading could be yoked to the American Farm Bureau Federation’s lawsuit challenging the entire Chesapeake Bay pollution diet. They did not want to ruin the Bay’s best chance in decades at a comprehensive cleanup, so they refrained from challenging trading.
Under a trading scenario, a polluter can discharge more than its permit allows if it balances that overage with credits purchased from another entity that has reduced more pollution than required and therefore has “credits” to sell.
Some advocates think the buyers of credits will likely be wastewater plants or power plants already in an area with poor air or water quality. For that reason, some advocates fear trading will lead to environmental injustices.
—–
Join ODU Magazine on Facebook here at this LINK…..
Join ODU Magazine on our Twitter fishing site here at this LINK…..
Join ODU Magazine on our Twitter hunting site here at this LINK…..
.