Md. farmers are doing their share for Chesapeake Bay

Environmental IssuesEnvironmental PollutionAgricultureLivestock Farming

The recent commentary by representatives of Senior Scientists and Policymakers for the Bay regarding poultry waste regulations was wrong in many ways ("No more half-measures," June 18).

They are correct that more people and their pollution will stress our environment. More people will reverse the progress that agriculture is making. TheU.S. Environmental Protection Agencyreports that agriculture has made tremendous progress in reducing nutrient contributions to the Chesapeake Bay. Urban and suburban sectors are getting worse.

They are wrong to describe agriculture's programs as a "voluntary, collaborative approach." They imply that there are no Maryland rules for the proper use of animal manures and fertilizers, but they know better. Maryland's 1998 law created far-reaching requirements for farmers — among America's most restrictive. Ask any farmer. They are not "mostly voluntary" as claimed.

Some area states do not have a strong program like Maryland, but this group wants readers to think that Maryland has a weak program. The facts don't support that allegation.

They mistakenly claim that agriculture lags behind other sectors in reducing pollution. Throughout the watershed, agriculture has reached about half of its 2010 pollution reduction goal. Not good enough, we agree. But the urban/suburban sectors went backward. Whose record is better, agriculture achieving nearly 50 percent of the goal or urban/suburban going backward by 90 percent?

They mention progress being made by sewage treatment plants, but they fail to mention the volume of human waste that escapes through leaking pipes before reaching the plants. They fail to mention the 1.4 billion gallons of escaped wastewater reported to the state last year.

They call for chicken manure to have the same "disposal" rules as human sewage. Chicken manure does not contain the toxins, household cleaning products, unused medications, man-made steroids, reproductive hormones, oil and grease and other products often disposed of through sinks or toilets. No wonder human waste needs more treatment.

Farmers are making improvements, and the Chesapeake Bay is benefiting. On-the-farm pollution prevention practices installed today might not show benefits for several years, but they will eventually. The current course of action is working. Let's not drive already heavily regulated farms out of business. Without farms, water quality would be even worse.

Andrew McLean, Centreville

The writer is president of Delmarva Poultry Industry, Inc.

Copyright © 2014, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
Environmental IssuesEnvironmental PollutionAgricultureLivestock Farming
  • Fix the Conowingo before another Hurricane Agnes hits [Letter]
    Fix the Conowingo before another Hurricane Agnes hits [Letter]

    I read with interest commentator Anirban Basu's article touting what a great asset the Conowingo dam is and how it enhances the lives of all Marylanders ("Support the dam to support Md.," Oct. 13).

  • How about aerators to clean up the bay?
    How about aerators to clean up the bay?

    I just read the article about dredging the Susquehanna River, and I couldn't help thinking back to the Seoul Olympics where they used aerators to clean up their filthy water and they got it clean enough that all of the rowing events were held in very safe water ("Study: Dredging little help...

  • Damming the bay's pollution
    Damming the bay's pollution

    Here's the gist of the recent report by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on the Conowingo Dam: Don't confuse a red herring with a red tide. The notion that all the pollution woes of the Chesapeake Bay could be heaped on one 86-year-old hydroelectric facility on the Lower Susquehanna River was...

  • All Maryland's waterways deserve protection
    All Maryland's waterways deserve protection

    The Clean Water Act has brought progress to the Chesapeake Bay, but in order to continue the bay on the path to success we must protect all the waterways in Maryland, including the Anacostia River ("Close Clean Water Act loophole," Nov. 12).

  • Support Clean Water Act
    Support Clean Water Act

    On the 42nd anniversary of the Clean Water Act, a new report from Environment America, "Waterways Restored," highlights the success the law has meant for the Anacostia River, taking it from a state of horrific pollution to giving some hope that it will be safe for swimming and fishing in little...

  • Hogan needs to reverse O'Malley's onerous farm rules
    Hogan needs to reverse O'Malley's onerous farm rules

    In what will be seen as one of soon-to-be ex-Gov. Martin O'Malley's parting shots to the incoming Hogan administration, Mr. O'Malley is pushing through new regulations controlling how farmers fertilize their land ("O'Malley rushes to propose new pollution rules," Nov. 15). Never mind the fact...

  • Dam cleanup too costly
    Dam cleanup too costly

    Regarding the recent commentary about the Conowingo Dam ("Maryland can enforce dam cleanup," Nov. 19), Bob Irvin is correct for the most part. However, let's keep in mind that the Conowingo is a man-made obstruction to sediment, leaves and tree logs that Mother Nature really intended to go to...

  • Denying Conowingo permit won't clean bay
    Denying Conowingo permit won't clean bay

    While I understand the concern about accumulated nutrient buildup in the sediment upstream of the Conowingo Dam posing a hazard to the health of the Chesapeake Bay, as an engineer I do not see what the operation of the dam's power station has anything to do with it ("Maryland can enforce dam...

Comments
Loading