River Board Actions Disturbing
EDITOR'S NOTE: The following is a letter Mr. Seubert wrote to the Monocacy River Board on June 8, a day after the Board met at Winchester Hall. The Frederick Extra has written about the troubles on the board here, and here, and continues to follow the story. Photos of the Monocacy River, courtesy of Mr. Seubert.
Thank you for allowing me to speak last night. I respected the chair's request to wrap up my comments after three minutes, even though many people on multiple occasions have spoken for ten minutes or more after the hearings. I had a lot more to say so I'm attaching my prepared comments to this email in case you want to read what I didn't get a chance to say.
I'm profoundly disappointed and disturbed by what I witnessed last night. The discussion and revisions you made did nothing to advance the board's objectives. Indeed, they are totally antithetical to them. Let me remind you what they are - from the Carroll County website.
The River Board's objectives, as outlined by the Monocacy Scenic River Management Plan, include:
Improving water quality
Helping maintain and restore the ecological health and productivity of the River
Encouraging land use compatibility and attention to environmentally sensitive areas to maximize conservation and use of riparian resources
Identifying and facilitating appropriate uses and alternative protective measures of significant scenic and ecological areas, historic and archaeological sites, and other valued resources
Providing resource information about the Monocacy watershed for local, state and federal governments, elected officials and the citizens of Carroll and Frederick counties
Developing multi-jurisdictional cooperation and coordination for the management and protection of the River corridor
Increasing public awareness about important river resource values through public relations and environmental education
Notice the first objective is to improve water quality. Not only has this board gone on record that the plan is not about cleaning the water, you went so far as to remove the chapter dedicated to water quality! The second objective is completely impossible to achieve without riparian setbacks, which you have reduced to a mere mention of in the footnotes.
I could go on to highlight your failures in achieving each objective, but you should understand my point is that every change this board has made to the original draft has been 100% geared toward protecting property rights while eviscerating any substantive recommendations that would actually benefit the river, which has become an afterthought in these proceedings.
From the river's perspective this board, this plan, and this process have been an absolute 360 degree failure. But it has been a huge victory for cementing protections for landowners along the river. That's why I suggested you change the title to the "Carroll County Property Rights Protection Plan".
Here is your cycle of failure: You poisoned the well right out of the gate by not including landowners in the discussion. Then you recklessly and stupidly drew heavy handed lines across and around people's homes and productive crop land. What were you thinking?! This of course provoked the ire of Carroll County officials who live for this type of controversy. You couldn't have teed up a better opportunity for them to capitalize on their anti-UN, agenda 21 scare tactics and ignite a revolt from landowners - even though this board predates and has nothing to do with any of that stuff.
The first draft released was DOA and you never had control of what was intended to be a productive, collaborative, and thoughtful process. You blew a critical opportunity to educate the broader community on the facts of the river's poor health, and the benefits and means of protecting it. Your final product will be a meaningless brochure.
This plan is very much a microcosm of climate change and local sustainability, both of which some officials - especially Richard Rothschild - scoff at. It all circles back to paranoia and fear over agenda 21 which is evident from Carroll's withdrawal form ICLEI. If you don't know what I'm talking about you need to thoroughly understand it because this is the core premise underlying Carroll's confounding - and borderline unethical - interference with the plan, which has nothing at all to do with the river itself.
In the final analysis, your biggest failure was in not opening the minds of the agriculture community to the unique risks they face from a debilitated ecology and how restoring it will provide essential ecosystem services that will actually benefit them. For instance, one of the farmers approached me after the meeting and said that high CO2 helps grow bigger crops and that global warming extends the growing season. Uh, NO and NO. Just as I had mentioned in my remarks, I tried to explain to him that sustained periods of high heat (over 86 degrees) shut down a plant's ability to photosynthesize which ultimately kills them (which I happened to learn in my master naturalist studies). Feel free to read more about it here.
I went on to explain that this is exactly what happened to crops here last year and that it's a fact that much of the region was declared a federal disaster area as a result. He said that happens every year and stormed off. This is precisely the kind of unproductive ignorance and misinformation that you are in a privileged position to cure, but failed to do so. Most of these farmers don't have the access or background to understand the science that underlies this plan. You couldn't explain it to them and so now it's all lost in the aether. What a waste of time and resources.
Let's also be clear about this - some people may think the river is scenic, but you should know as well as I do that it's only at a fraction of it's scenic and natural potential. Please take a look at the attached pictures from a recent float trip I took and tell me honestly if they reflect a healthy river that people in Frederick and Carroll would be proud to call their own.
As I mentioned last night, I question the legitimacy of Mr. Bell's seat on the board. Correct me if I'm wrong, but as a registered voter in Frederick County, he is ineligible to represent Carroll County on the board.
I also question the legitimacy of the bi-county board itself. Again, please correct me if I'm wrong that Frederick County adopted a resolution in 1992 authorizing a stand-alone Frederick board. It wasn't until 2009 in the River Board by-laws that Carroll County was recognized as a joint member. It's my understanding that a joint county resolution was discussed but never consummated in either county. This was affirmed to me by Byron Madigan after the hearing. Please demonstrate to me, from a documented legal standpoint where this joint board is justified.
This whole thing stinks from top to bottom. The process has risen to the level of an absurdity. At this point, the river has a far better chance at prosperity if you don't produce a plan.
Frederick County needs to go this alone, because it's abundantly clear that Carroll County leadership doesn't care a lick about the river.
Sincerely,
Matt Seubert
Urbana
