Nearly a decade ago, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation decided that the best way to save the bay was to extend a hand to its biggest polluter - the crop and poultry farmers who apply large amounts of fertilizer to the land.
The alliance between the region's largest environmental group and the powerful farm lobby has helped bring millions of dollars in new anti-pollution funds to the bay watershed - and, the foundation says, improved the odds that the Chesapeake will one day be restored.
But many environmental advocates question the foundation's friendly approach. They say that tough regulations, not just incentives, are needed to force farmers to control pollution.
"I've never seen an industry cooperatively clean up its mess," said Scott Edwards, legal director of the Waterkeeper Alliance, a national watchdog group that has sued farmers and state agriculture departments over pollution issues. "Industry only responds to force."
The bay foundation's unusual approach was evident last month when the administration of Gov. Martin O'Malley revised its proposed rules on pollution-control permits for poultry farmers. Instead of requiring permits for 200 poultry operations, the administration scaled back to about half that number after farmers complained that the rules were onerous.
While many other environmental groups railed against the O'Malley administration, bay foundation officials called the revised rules "a step forward."
Foundation President William Baker said last week that while he wished the regulations were stronger, the revised proposal is a good start for a state that has no poultry-discharge rules now.
"The way to make them more effective at reducing pollution is to show that they're workable, show that they will not unfairly put the farmer at financial risk, and show there is financial support to pay for them," Baker said of the new rules. "Let's show they work, and that they can work even better if they're improved."
But Sen. Paul G. Pinsky, an environmental advocate who is concerned that the proposed rules are not strict enough, said that it is never prudent to accept weaker measures and hope that they'll become stronger.
"I don't think we should settle for less at the beginning of the debate, because the political process is going to make us settle for less anyway," said Pinsky, a Prince George's County Democrat.
