We keep waiting for some good news about the Bay, but it doesn't come. Here's
the latest from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation:

http://www.cbf.org/site/News2?page=N...m5pu741.app26a


--
John H
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes (A true binary thinker!)

John H wrote:
We keep waiting for some good news about the Bay, but it doesn't
come. Here's
the latest from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation:


http://www.cbf.org/site/News2?page=N...m5pu741.app26a


--
John H
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and
necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes (A true binary thinker!)

Yep, pollution. It's a good thing that the republicans want to relax
the environmental laws, huh?

wrote in message
ups.com...

John H wrote:
We keep waiting for some good news about the Bay, but it doesn't
come. Here's
the latest from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation:


http://www.cbf.org/site/News2?page=N...m5pu741.app26a


--
John H
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and
necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes (A true binary thinker!)

Yep, pollution. It's a good thing that the republicans want to relax
the environmental laws, huh?


Why did you have to turn this into a political thing Kevin?

John posted some disturbing news. Both republicans and democrats equally
pollute.

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

John H wrote:
We keep waiting for some good news about the Bay, but it doesn't
come. Here's
the latest from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation:



http://www.cbf.org/site/News2?page=N...m5pu741.app26a


--
John H
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and
necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes (A true binary thinker!)

Yep, pollution. It's a good thing that the republicans want to
relax
the environmental laws, huh?


Why did you have to turn this into a political thing Kevin?

John posted some disturbing news. Both republicans and democrats
equally
pollute.

Why do you keep calling me Kevin, Jim? Now, take a look around you,
Jim. I fully understand that Democrats and Republicans both pollute,
but tell me, which of those two do you think is to blame for relaxing
environmental laws? Do you think that by relaxing or sometimes
eliminating environmental laws that they deter, or add to the pollution
problem? I didn't "turn it into a political thing", Jim, it all ready
was one.

"John H" wrote in message
...

We keep waiting for some good news about the Bay, but it doesn't come.
Here's
the latest from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation:

http://www.cbf.org/site/News2?page=N...m5pu741.app26a

John, how often is stuff like this really in peoples' faces in the news? I
wonder because it's the kind of story which, if people see it once every two
months, they shake their heads, say "that sucks", and then forget about it
and do nothing. Same problem here with Lake Ontario. The NY DEC is finding
increasing levels of dioxin in fish, publicizing the results (not often
enough), and you hear people say "Wow...is that still a problem? I thought
they were taking care of it". (They???)

On Tue, 24 May 2005 17:13:21 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .

We keep waiting for some good news about the Bay, but it doesn't come.
Here's
the latest from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation:

http://www.cbf.org/site/News2?page=N...m5pu741.app26a

John, how often is stuff like this really in peoples' faces in the news? I
wonder because it's the kind of story which, if people see it once every two
months, they shake their heads, say "that sucks", and then forget about it
and do nothing. Same problem here with Lake Ontario. The NY DEC is finding
increasing levels of dioxin in fish, publicizing the results (not often
enough), and you hear people say "Wow...is that still a problem? I thought
they were taking care of it". (They???)


It seems to make the 'real' news around here about twice a year, when the
Maryland and then the Virginia governors decide it's time for a little
environmental pat on the back. It won't *really* hit the news until the crabbers
go out of business (which is happening) and the commercial fishermen can't make
a living. Then maybe something will happen.

It makes the 'newsgroup news' about once every two months, when I see something
I deem newsworthy!

--
John H
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes (A true binary thinker!)

"John H" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 24 May 2005 17:13:21 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
. ..

We keep waiting for some good news about the Bay, but it doesn't come.
Here's
the latest from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation:

http://www.cbf.org/site/News2?page=N...m5pu741.app26a

John, how often is stuff like this really in peoples' faces in the news? I
wonder because it's the kind of story which, if people see it once every
two
months, they shake their heads, say "that sucks", and then forget about it
and do nothing. Same problem here with Lake Ontario. The NY DEC is finding
increasing levels of dioxin in fish, publicizing the results (not often
enough), and you hear people say "Wow...is that still a problem? I thought
they were taking care of it". (They???)


It seems to make the 'real' news around here about twice a year, when the
Maryland and then the Virginia governors decide it's time for a little
environmental pat on the back. It won't *really* hit the news until the
crabbers
go out of business (which is happening) and the commercial fishermen can't
make
a living. Then maybe something will happen.

Well....there ya go. The farmers have to use some sort of fertilizer, and
even organic fertilizers will contribute to this problem. Other states are
learning to deal with agricultural runoff. Sounds like nobody gives a damn
there.

wrote in message
oups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

John H wrote:
We keep waiting for some good news about the Bay, but it doesn't
come. Here's
the latest from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation:



http://www.cbf.org/site/News2?page=N...m5pu741.app26a


--
John H
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and
necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes (A true binary thinker!)

Yep, pollution. It's a good thing that the republicans want to
relax
the environmental laws, huh?


Why did you have to turn this into a political thing Kevin?

John posted some disturbing news. Both republicans and democrats
equally
pollute.

Why do you keep calling me Kevin, Jim? Now, take a look around you,
Jim.


OK Kevin, done.

I fully understand that Democrats and Republicans both pollute,....snip


So we agree. Thanks.


I didn't "turn it into a political thing", Jim, it all ready
was one.


How so Kevin? I saw nothing political in John's post or link. What exactly
did you see that was political in either?

"*JimH*" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
oups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

John H wrote:
We keep waiting for some good news about the Bay, but it doesn't
come. Here's
the latest from the Chesapeake Bay Foundation:



http://www.cbf.org/site/News2?page=N...m5pu741.app26a


--
John H
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and
necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes (A true binary thinker!)

Yep, pollution. It's a good thing that the republicans want to
relax
the environmental laws, huh?


Why did you have to turn this into a political thing Kevin?

John posted some disturbing news. Both republicans and democrats
equally
pollute.

Why do you keep calling me Kevin, Jim? Now, take a look around you,
Jim.


OK Kevin, done.

I fully understand that Democrats and Republicans both pollute,....snip


So we agree. Thanks.


I didn't "turn it into a political thing", Jim, it all ready
was one.


How so Kevin? I saw nothing political in John's post or link. What
exactly did you see that was political in either?


You're both right and wrong sorta kinda. I'm not familiar with the local
situation around the bay, but I do know that what's causing a lot of the
problem is the same thing that's causing problems in a couple of the Finger
Lakes of upstate NY: Runoff from farms, mostly normal fertilizers, and it
doesn't matter THAT much whether they're synthetic fertilizers or organic
ones, like composted manure which the Amish farmers use. Here, I don't see
much arguing between the parties when it comes to working out these
problems. Local pols have to literally look their constituents in the eye,
and maybe watch restaurants, motels and marinas go out of business if they
allow a recreational resource like a lake turn to crap. I suspect that when
problems surrounding the Bay are fixed, it will also be local powers that
deal with it.

However, on a national level, where laws are made regarding more dangerous
pollutants, the Republican party is almost exclusively responsible for the
WEAKENING of the rules. If you don't agree with that, you're not reading
much.

Doug Kanter wrote:
You're both right and wrong sorta kinda. I'm not familiar with the local
situation around the bay, but I do know that what's causing a lot of the
problem is the same thing that's causing problems in a couple of the Finger
Lakes of upstate NY: Runoff from farms, mostly normal fertilizers, and it
doesn't matter THAT much whether they're synthetic fertilizers or organic
ones, like composted manure which the Amish farmers use.

In most watersheds, definitely including the Chesapeake, runoff from
lawns is also a very big problem.

NC addressed the issue of runoff from upland farms by q very effective
method: money. Farmers are given incentives (big enough to affect
profitability) to have a buffer system of ditches and dikes around their
fields, with natural cover, which captures much of the fertilizer run-off.



... Here, I don't see
much arguing between the parties when it comes to working out these
problems. Local pols have to literally look their constituents in the eye,
and maybe watch restaurants, motels and marinas go out of business if they
allow a recreational resource like a lake turn to crap.

Hmmph. I suspect that you don't see the arguing because the side with
the most money always wins. I also suspect that the environmental
picture up there isn't as rosy as you paint it... especially considering
the low population density.

The biggest problem for the US east coast ecosystems is very simple...
lots & lots & lots of people. For example, Boston Harbor, that fabled
avatar of aquapurity, has about 10X more 'stuff' flushed & drained into
it than the total volume, much less the tidal exchange volume. This
threshold was crossed back in the 1800s... and there are effectively
zero wetlands. Is this the model for the future?


... I suspect that when
problems surrounding the Bay are fixed, it will also be local powers that
deal with it.


I suspect that they'll continue to fail to deal with it. Making
well-publicized but ineffective & inexpensive gestures is a lot more
politically expedient.


However, on a national level, where laws are made regarding more dangerous
pollutants, the Republican party is almost exclusively responsible for the
WEAKENING of the rules. If you don't agree with that, you're not reading
much.


Heh, under Reagan the EPA took a big hit. Under Bush Jr the EPA has all
but shut down. There is no effective environmental law enforcement on
the Federal level.

DSK