Environmental advocates have warned President Donald Trump's proposed budget could cripple restoration of the Chesapeake Bay.
Federal agencies have long partnered with six watershed states to protect its waterways.
Harry Campbell, science policy and advocacy director for the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, said the cuts would severely affect Pennsylvania and beyond. He added the Environmental Protection Agency, which oversees the Chesapeake Bay Program, faces a 54.5% budget reduction, from $9.1 billion to $4.2 billion.
"This would eliminate critical state grants and other support mechanisms that Pennsylvania relies upon in working with farmers, upgrading wastewater treatment plants and improving fisheries that are so critical to the healthy condition of our urban streams but also to our economic vitality," Campbell outlined.
Campbell noted the EPA supports states in improving water quality by funding projects and offering low-interest loans for upgrading drinking water and wastewater systems. The agency also offers scientific guidance, helps develop monitoring and reporting systems and, in some cases, aids in enforcing pollution-reduction measures.
Campbell pointed out numerous other federal agencies are facing major funding cuts. For Pennsylvania, he contended, the most significant is the U.S. Geological Survey, set to lose $564 million in funding, which could halt research on the effects of climate change and eliminate or curtail essential water quality monitoring.
"This is the type of research that is looking at what is happening on the ground in our local communities, on our farms, in our streams," Campbell emphasized. "And trying to ascertain ways that we can utilize science and information to make informed decisions about the future of those communities."
Campbell noted the U.S. Department of Agriculture and local conservation programs provide crucial support to farmers by helping them design and implement conservation practices. The efforts improve water quality, soil health and herd health while reducing flooding and farm input costs. Proposed budget cuts could threaten the programs and the environmental and agricultural benefits they deliver across the region.
Disclosure: The Chesapeake Bay Foundation contributes to our fund for reporting on Energy Policy, Rural/Farming, Sustainable Agriculture, and Water. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Arkansas lawmakers passed several bills during this year's legislative session to upgrade and improve the state's water and wastewater systems.
One of the measures is Act 578, which would provide $500 million for projects through 2043.
Arkansas Secretary of Agriculture Wes Ward said the state's current infrastructure has been in place for decades, and repairs are constantly needed.
"There's still a very big need," said Ward. "Just about every week, we hear stories of some sort of water-wastewater system failing, or not adequate or needs to expand or needs to contract. All of those infrastructure issues continue."
Act 578 must be approved by voters in the 2026 general election. Lawmakers also passed a $25 million grant program to help municipalities in emergency situations.
More than a half a million dollars in bills were passed during the session to address current and future water needs of all 75 Arkansas counties.
Ward said the state's water plan was updated last year for the first time since 2014.
"We expect when we turn on our faucet that it's going to work and that it's going to be clean and you can use it," said Ward. "We're seeing growing instances where that's not always the case, and so it's incredibly important - we do want people to take it for granted, but they also need to understand there's a lot of infrastructure and things behind the scenes to make that work."
Officials are currently taking an inventory of all levees across the state to ensure they are structurally sound and can function properly during heavy flooding.
get more stories like this via email
North Dakota is facing growing opposition to two massive dairy operations planned near the Red River. Environmental advocates say the projects could harm water quality locally and in downstream communities - including Lake Winnipeg in Canada.
Madeline Luke, a volunteer with the Dakota Resource Council, said farms proposed in Trail County and Abercrombie would accommodate more than 37,000 animals. She said she believes the massive operations would generate waste on a scale the state has never seen.
"These dairies are situated within a mile and a half of the Red River," she said. "Any water pollution that occurs will go straight into the river and end up in Lake Winnipeg. Lake Winnipeg has been labeled the most endangered lake in the world."
North Dakota's anti-corporate farming law, which once limited large-scale livestock operations, was weakened in 2021, opening the door to more industrial agriculture across the state.
James Beddome, executive director of the Manitoba Eco-Network, said cross-border collaboration is essential, since manure runoff from North Dakota could feed algae blooms in one of Canada's largest lakes.
"Sixty football fields worth of manure slurry, and both of these operations are within one and a half miles of the Red River," he said. "The Red River then connects to Lake Winnipeg. What they're doing there is going to have impacts to us downstream here in Manitoba."
Opponents have argued that the mega-dairies threaten local water, public health and small farms, warning that decisions made in North Dakota could have international consequences. Groups on both sides of the border are urging stricter oversight before permits are finalized.
Disclosure: Dakota Resource Council contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Energy Policy, Environment, Rural/Farming. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
The Mississippi River tops a new list of America's most endangered rivers, in part because federal officials propose shifting flood disaster costs to states.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency's acting chief advocates moving recovery responsibilities to state governments.
Eileen Shader, senior director of flood plain restoration for the advocacy group American Rivers, which issued the report, warned it could destabilize flood protections for communities along the Mississippi.
"The Trump administration has called for FEMA to be dramatically changed, if not eliminated," Shader pointed out. "We thought it was really important to highlight the importance of FEMA and the federal role in managing disasters like flooding to our local communities."
The 2025 Most Endangered Rivers report noted it is the Mississippi's 13th appearance on the list, citing the river's history of "catastrophic floods," which have shaped national disaster policies.
FEMA has historically followed what can be described as a "locally executed, state-managed, federally supported" disaster model. Shader argued the partnership is critical for multistate crises.
"Especially we see really catastrophic events, we see national disasters declared, which opens up a lot of federal funding which can then flow to states and local communities to help them to recover and to become more resilient in the future," Shader emphasized. "It's a shared responsibility."
About 20 million people depend on the Mississippi River for drinking water, agriculture and wildlife habitat, which advocates say are all at risk if FEMA reduces flood response support this summer.
get more stories like this via email