Toxic Algal Blooms Are A Growing Threat. Trump’s Budget Cuts Won't Help.

Proposed cuts to a number of federal programs would make efforts to fight toxic algal blooms more difficult.

It’s been a disturbing scene on a number of southern California beaches of late.

In recent weeks, hundreds of dead and sick seabirds, sea lions and other marine mammals have been washing up on the beaches in Ventura and Santa Barbara counties.

The cause of the die-off is believed to be domoic acid, a neurotoxin produced by a massive algal bloom that has formed in waters just off the coast.

While algal blooms themselves aren’t unusual for the region, the current situation is so extreme it was described by one expert as the “worst year” for domoic poisonings he’d ever seen.

The broader problem isn’t limited to the California coastline. Last summer, toxic algal blooms sprang up in more than 20 U.S. states, including South Florida, where the situation became so serious that authorities declared a state of emergency

The main contributing factor to these blooms’ growth is nutrient runoff from both agricultural and residential lands. Though blooms across the country are made up of different types of cyanobacteria — also known as blue-green algae — the nutrients that feed them — namely phosphorous and nitrates — are the same. And experts believe blooms are becoming both more frequent and more intense due to climate change

The blooms impact both local economies and public health to the tune of a conservatively-estimated $84 million annual price tag. In humans, algal blooms are known to cause rashes, stomach or liver issues and respiratory problems if ingested, swam in or even breathed in through mist. 

The conditions are ripe for 2017 to see a similar number of the toxic blooms as last year. Pat Glibert, an environmental science professor at the University of Maryland, said the challenges contributing to the growing spread of the blooms are “only increasing.” The conditions are ripe for 2017 to see a similar number of the toxic blooms as last year.

“I expect that we will have quite a number of blooms across the country, both in fresh waters and marine systems,” Glibert told HuffPost. “They will impact fisheries and they will impact jobs, so we need to be continuing to respond to these events.”

Open Image Modal
A bird swims through green algae near Ferril Lake in Denver, Colorado. Algal blooms, when toxic, can devastate local economies and the problem appears to be growing.
Credit: Helen H. Richardson/The Denver Post via Getty Images

And the blooms appear to be showing up earlier in the year, too. Back in California, Beverly Anderson-Abbs, a senior environmental scientist at the State Water Resources Control Board, said the agency has already seen 24 bloom events in freshwater bodies reported across the state so far this year.

Because their portal that tracks the blooms was not up and running at this time last year, Anderson-Abbs said she couldn’t say for sure whether that marks a definite increase over the previous year, but that number is not typical. 

“We certainly weren’t getting contacts from the various regions having problems that early in the year [last year],” Anderson-Abbs said. “Some lakes tend to bloom early, but we’re hearing about lakes that we hadn’t heard of previously that were in full bloom.”

Close monitoring and more research can help determine which approaches to controlling the notoriously unpredictable blooms, or potentially preventing them altogether, are needed.

Of course, that work doesn’t happen for free and a number of federal programs have supported both the monitoring of blooms and efforts to reduce bloom-feeding nutrient runoff have been slated for funding cuts under President Donald Trump’s spending plans.

According to analyses of the president’s so-called skinny budget proposal, released earlier this year, the Environmental Protection Agency’s Great Lakes Restoration Initiative would face a 97-percent, $290-million funding cut.

The Great Lakes program helps fund projects like one that is aiming to reduce phosphorous levels in Lake Erie, where blooms became so massive and so toxic in 2014 that they impacted the water supply of more than 400,000 people in Toledo, Ohio, leaving them without drinking water for several days.

Other geographically-specific EPA initiatives that earmark funding for bodies of water that have struggled with toxic algal blooms in recent years, like the Gulf of Mexico and Chesapeake Bay programs, are slated to be essentially eliminated under the president’s skinny budget. 

Similarly, as Mother Jones previously reported, programs at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that similarly address algal blooms, like the NOAA’s Sea Grant College Program and satellite work, are also facing the prospect of funding reductions or outright elimination — cuts that were maintained in the administration’s latest budget document released last month. 

Mae Wu, senior attorney of the Natural Resources Defense Council’s health program, said it is hard to see a scenario where the funding gap left behind by these cuts is filled by the states.

“Rolling back the funding on this is not going to improve our algal bloom situation,” Wu said. “States need more assistance to do this work, not less.”

Of course, the president’s budget is only a proposal and it is up to Congress to ultimately set the nation’s spending priorities.

There appears to be some bipartisan sentiment for increased federal funding for algal bloom programs, too, particularly for lawmakers representing districts who have been most severely impacted by toxic blooms.

In Florida, both Sen. Bill Nelson, a Democrat, and U.S. Rep. Brian Mast, a Republican, have proposed legislation aimed at addressing algal blooms. Nelson’s bill proposes additional funding for research into bloom control, while Mast’s bill calls for blooms to be added to the list of disasters that the Federal Emergency Management Agency can respond to.

Glibert is hopeful for similarly bipartisan support for broader algal bloom efforts currently waiting to be appropriated for funding, such as the efforts laid out in the federal Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act, which was reauthorized in 2014. The alternative scenario is not pretty. 

“We know there are more blooms occurring, so these budget cuts are devastating on multiple levels,” Glibert told HuffPost. “The economic effects of these blooms are enormous.”

Our 2024 Coverage Needs You

As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.

Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.

to keep our news free for all.

Support HuffPost

Before You Go

What You Can Do Right Now To Stop Donald Trump's Dangerous Climate Agenda
Strengthen city, county and state climate efforts(01 of07)
Open Image Modal
If the federal government refuses to stand up against climate change, it’ll be more important than ever for cities, counties and states to pick up the slack and become climate leaders. That means committing to divest from fossil fuels, embrace clean energy, set emissions targets and develop climate action plans, among other measures.

“The ominous signals coming out of D.C. point to even more work needed at the city and state level,” said Kate Kiely, national media deputy director at the Natural Resources Defense Council. In November, the NRDC announced partnerships with 20 cities across the country from St. Paul, Minnesota, to Houston, Texas, to make strides in renewable energy.

According to Brune, cities could have an especially big influence in the climate change fight. “We should be pushing cities to go 100 percent clean energy and to reject natural gas and coal and other fossil fuels,” he said. “A majority of people now live in cities, so this could have a dramatic impact.”

In the U.S., at least 20 cities have made commitments to rely completely on clean energy.

“People should organize and get their own cities to move forward,” Brune said.

Contact your mayor, city council, or county or state representative and get them to set a timeline to stop using fossil fuels.
(credit:Eduardo Munoz/Reuters)
Push companies and institutions to divest from fossil fuels(02 of07)
Open Image Modal
There are a lot of things that the president can’t undo. He can’t stop the fact that solar and wind are cheaper than coal and gas. He can’t change the fact that dozens of businesses have already committed to clean energy,” Brune said.

As of December, more than 640 institutions worldwide, including several universities, churches and for-profit companies and banks, have pledged to divest from their fossil fuel investments. According to Go Fossil Free, a 350.org campaign, the commitments amount to more than $3.4 trillion.

Consumers should petition companies to ditch their fossil fuel investments, and students should urge their schools and colleges to do the same.

“As we wrap up the hottest year in history, we know that investments in the fossil fuel industry fund these climate impacts. That’s why it’s more critical than ever that we push our institutions to divest from the fossil fuel companies that are knowingly perpetuating the climate crisis,” Lindsay Meiman, U.S. communications coordinator for 350.org, told HuffPost.

Want to push a company, school or place of worship to divest from fossil fuels? 350.org has a list of resources to help you start a campaign. Or find an existing one to get involved in.
(credit:Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Put your money where your mouth is(03 of07)
Open Image Modal
Petitions and protests can be powerful, but moving your money speaks volumes too. As a consumer and as an investor, ensure you're not personally financing climate change. This means, for example, choosing banks that are free of fossil fuel connections.

“Your ATM card or checking account or your mortgage, these should not be financed by companies that are taking your checking fees or other payments to subsidize the Dakota Access Pipeline or finance drilling offshore. Make sure your money aligns with your values,” Brune said.

In September, Amalgamated Bank became the first North American bank to commit to divest 100 percent from fossil fuels. Aspiration has bank accounts that are fossil fuel-free, and Beneficial State Bank has credit cards that don’t invest in fossil fuels.

Anthony Hobley, CEO of the Carbon Tracker Initiative, said consumers should also ensure that their pensions, 401(k) or other retirement savings accounts are similarly not underwriting fossil fuel companies.

“A lot of pressure can be made through the financial industry,” Hobley said from London. “Ordinary people who hold pensions can put pressure on companies through their pensions. Put pressure on the people who manage your money and that’s one way to keep pressure on those companies too.”

The financial services companies that manage retirement accounts “aren’t used to getting many letters from the people whose money they manage,” Hobley added. “It wouldn’t take much of an organized effort for them to take notice.”

Are your investments supporting fossil fuels? FossilFreeFunds.org is a web tool that allows people to check whether their individual investments or employer-provided 401(k) is supporting coal companies, oil and gas producers, and fossil-fired utilities.
(credit:Andrew Burton/Getty Images)
Making a "financial case" for clean energy(04 of07)
Open Image Modal
Hobley believes the “best chance” we have of convincing Trump to care about climate change is to make a compelling “financial case” for renewables.

With new clean energy technologies getting more efficient and cheaper than fossil fuels, a transition to renewables is “inevitable,” said Hobley. It’s just a matter of time.

“Trump can no more stop this transition than a previous U.S. president could’ve stopped the transition from steam locomotives to the automobile or the typewriter to the computer. The technological genie is already out of the bag,” he said. “It’s not a case of ‘if,’ but ‘when.’ But the ‘when’ is important because of the 2 degrees budget, and that’s where a lack of political leadership or resistance can have a real impact.”

Clear political leadership from both the U.S. and China could mean a "smoother" and faster transition to clean energy. A lack thereof, however, could “make it easier for big oil and gas companies to stay in denial” — and that “would be to their detriment,” Hobley said. “It would mean pouring more money, billions or trillions of dollars, into fossil fuel assets that we simply don’t need.”

Trump now has the opportunity to make the United States a leader in clean energy.

“These are complicated and highly technical products,” Hobley said. “With an educated and skilled workforce, these are the kinds of things that should be manufactured in the U.S.”

Creating new jobs was a central part of Trump’s election platform. Maybe someone should remind him that the clean energy industry creates more jobs per unit of energy than coal and natural gas. In 2015, the number of U.S. jobs in solar energy overtook those in oil and natural gas extraction for the very first time.

A 2015 report by NextGen Climate America found that a transition to clean energy would add a million jobs by 2030 and up to 2 million jobs by 2050, while increasing the nation's gross domestic product by $290 billion and boosting household income.

We should be citing such figures and urging utility companies and public utility commissions to embrace clean energy. (Public utility commissions regularly hold hearings that are open to the public. Attend them, and voice your thoughts!)
(credit:Aaron Bernstein/Reuters)
Speak out!(05 of07)
Open Image Modal
What’s the single biggest way you can influence climate change? According to the NRDC, it’s speaking up.

“Talk to your friends and family, and make sure your representatives are making good decisions,” Aliya Haq, deputy director of NRDC’s Clean Power Plan Initiative, wrote in a blog post. “The main reason elected officials do anything difficult is because their constituents make them.”

In the coming months and years, “there will be mass mobilizations that folks should join to push back against Trump’s regressive policies and hateful rhetoric,” said 350.org’s Meiman. “Folks can engage online by joining online actions, signing petitions and contributing their voice on social media to push back on Trump’s agenda.”

You can also participate in protests in your area or join and support local nonprofits in their fight against climate change.
(credit:Pacific Press/Getty Images)
Reduce your own carbon footprint(06 of07)
Open Image Modal
Power your own home with renewable energy, invest in energy-efficient appliances and lightbulbs, and remember to weatherize.

“Building heating and cooling are among the biggest uses of energy,” said NRDC’s Haq. Make your home more energy-efficient by sealing drafts and ensuring your home is adequately insulated and ventilated too.

Also consider changing your diet. “Cut down on meat consumption or even eliminate it from your diet completely,” Brune said. “I do think that people can have a powerful impact on the environment just by eating less meat.”

It takes 14 times as much biologically productive land to produce 1 ton of beef as it takes to produce 1 ton of grain, according to the Global Footprint Network.

Global livestock is also responsible for 14.5 percent of all anthropogenic carbon emissions, data from the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization shows.

Driving a fuel-efficient vehicle is another way to reduce your carbon footprint. You can also take steps to be more fuel efficient when you're on the road, no matter what car you drive.
(credit:Hinterhaus Productions/Getty Images)
Support environmental journalism(07 of07)
Open Image Modal
A major shortcoming of journalists during the presidential election was their failure to highlight climate change as a vital topic ― and to force Trump (and Hillary Clinton, too) to address this crisis.

Over the next four years, Trump needs to be held accountable, and the press must make climate change a central issue in his presidency.

The Society of Environmental Journalists, a nonprofit membership organization supporting environmental journalists in the U.S. and around the world, aims to “improve the quality, accuracy and visibility of reporting on the environment.” You can also support nonprofit environmental news outlets such as Inside Climate, Grist and High Country News.
(credit:Jewel Samad/Getty Images)