Pollution

In response to the recent article, "Bill would give farmers 10-year reprieve on new regs" (March 27) I wish to add more detail on why this bill, Senate Bill 1029, will be detrimental for Marylanders and the Chesapeake Bay. Agriculture is the single largest source of nutrient pollution in the Chesapeake Bay. That fact alone means that farms must be closely watched to ensure they are following state and federal regulations. The proposal contradicts this important idea by providing the possibility for farms to have a 10-year exemption from new pollution regulations.

Nobody asked me, but here are my six recommendations in the matter of the highly publicized, closely watched, widely criticized, rift-causing lawsuit brought by the Waterkeeper Alliance against the Hudson family poultry farm over alleged pollution in a tributary of the Chesapeake Bay on Maryland's Eastern Shore: •Everybody calm down, starting with the Maryland General Assembly. Already, the House of Delegates has authorized $300,000 — taxpayer dollars — for the legal fees of Alan Hudson, the farmer.

What industry gets a significant discount on property taxes funded by other taxpayers? Can you think of a business the price of whose products is supported by the treasury? Or a business that is paid from taxpayer funds not to make its products? Wouldn't you like to have a business that has access to cheap, guaranteed loans or casualty insurance subsidized by taxpayers? The only industry I know of that has available all of these entitlements is agriculture. Recently, the agriculture industry has profited from another publicly financed benefit.

The concept behind the proposed Maryland Agriculture Certainty Program is sound. Farmers would voluntarily agree to meet relatively high standards for pollution runoff and hire third-party inspectors to verify the results. In return, they would be spared from new regulations for 10 years. In a business that is fraught with uncertainty from droughts and floods, rising and falling commodity prices and boom or bust crop yields, the appeal of predictability is clear enough. The model is not unlike the discharge permit of some manufacturers or sewage treatment plants - a kind of contract between regulators and polluters.

A Baltimore Circuit Court judge ordered a halt Monday to construction work on the city's planned casino until a hearing Friday on a lawsuit by Westport residents alleging that the city and state improperly approved an inadequate cleanup of industrial contamination at the site. Judge Yolanda Tanner issued a temporary restraining against CBAC Gaming, the city and the Maryland Department of the Environment after lawyers for the Westport residents complained that work had begun on the Horseshoe Casino, despite assurances last week from the casino owner's lawyer that it would not engage in any construction activity before the scheduled hearing.

In October, Waterfront Partnership's Healthy Harbor Initiative released the State of Baltimore's Harbor Report, an assessment of the current health of Baltimore's Inner Harbor and its surrounding tributaries. According to the study, the water quality received an overall poor score. Anyone walking near the Inner Harbor can see from the bulkhead that the water is littered with trash, debris and pollutants, unfortunately making it unsafe for swimming and fishing. An unsettling contributor to this problem is the fact that of Maryland's 600 marinas, only 25 percent are currently designated as a Maryland Clean Marina by the Department of Natural Resources.

Scientists have found reproductive abnormalities in yellow perch in three Maryland rivers that are either heavily suburbanized or rapidly developing, which they say helps explain why the distinctive black-striped fish are not thriving in those Chesapeake Bay tributaries and may be linked to toxic pollution. Significant numbers of eggs produced by spawning female perch in the Severn and South rivers in Anne Arundel County and in Mattawoman Creek in Charles County failed to develop completely, according to a three-year survey conducted by federal and state researchers.

A recent article reported a serious problem in the implementation of Maryland's agricultural nutrient management program, which was designed to help protect the Chesapeake and coastal bays from agricultural pollution by requiring farmers to submit manure and fertilizer management plans to the state ("State's oversight of farms criticized," Feb. 3). I was concerned to read that 30 percent or 40 percent of the plans Maryland's Department of Agriculture audits are found to be non-compliant and that only about 10 percent of the farms are checked.

Tim Wheeler 's recent article sheds new light on the confusing, distasteful, yet critically important problem of fecal pollution from chickens in the Chesapeake and coastal bays ("Maryland farm oversight called weak," Feb 2). The problem appears to arise from a failed though well-meant "model" program instituted by the state. Maryland regulators seem to be engaged in a paper chase, in which they make sure that farmers have submitted plans to control runoff, then file those plans away with little effort to verify whether they are actually being implemented.

A trio of environmental groups warned Monday they would sue the operator of three coal-fired power plants in Maryland for allegedly discharging excessive amounts of nutrient pollution into Chesapeake Bay rivers and trying to mask their violations by transferring pollution "credits" among facilities. Food & Water Watch, the Patuxent Riverkeeper and the Potomac Riverkeeper contend that NRG Energy has been violating state-imposed pollution discharge limits for the past three years at its Chalk Point, Morgantown and Dickerson power plants.