News Ticker

What’s right with ‘dead zones’? Not much.

How well the Chesapeake Bay and its associated watershed – along with other similar coastal areas – can survive pollution is in the hands of the 3rd U.S. Court of Appeals.

At issue is a lawsuit by farmers and 20 states challenging a plan by the Obama administration to tighten pollution efforts tied to the Chesapeake’s deteriorating waters. Like portions of the Mississippi delta in Louisiana, the Chesapeake Bay has notable ‘dead zones’ where nothing lives, thanks to pollutants caused by farm runoff and other sources.

But there are some enlightened constituencies. Maryland and Virginia are among the localized states supporting the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plan to protect and restore this important fishery/tourist area. According to a report by the Associated Press, “This lawsuit attacks our efforts to restore the health of the Chesapeake Bay and strengthen its crucial economic value,” Maryland Attorney General Douglas Gansler said. “Maryland must preserve its partnership with an effective EPA to safeguard our environment and sustain the thousands of jobs supported by the bay.”

On the other side, reports the A.P., are mainly red states who oppose the Chesapeake plan including “Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming. Most are led by Republican governors.”

How the court decides could have far reaching implications. Legal experts say if the lawsuit against the EPA succeeds, it will be viewed as a precedent other courts might follow.

You know where I fall on this score. The largely GOP states view the environment as a commodity to be manipulated and, if need be, subservient to man. I don’t buy that argument. Their shortsightedness also creates another sort of dead zone – the space between their ears.

About Dave Bradley (264 Articles)
I was a writer by trade so one would think letters would come easily for me. It is so now, but wasn't always that way. Indeed, the first letter was written the Monday after Ellen started her freshman year in college. For years I've wondered - with no good answers - why I swiveled my office chair toward my computer screen to fire up a word processing document for that first letter. I just don't know. I just did. Perhaps it was the angst of separation or wanting to say things that had gone unsaid at that moment when we parted ways in front of her college dormitory. What was a one-off became habitual. When her brother Reid enrolled in the same college, his name was added to the salutation line. They were kids then and are adults now. No matter. The letter writing habit remains so today. I live in Brevard, North Carolina. I'm well away from where they live and don't see them nearly as often as I'd like. That's why letters, at least to me, fill the void of distance. The pages give me something to say and the space to say it. There is no assurance they read the letters; indeed, I have never asked if they do so. With the pace of their busy lives who could blame them for letting a letter sit unopened? Over time, it has dawned on me that the letters are both communicative - and cathartic. By nature, letters are about the writer; the writer can only write about their situation. Perhaps that is as it should be. It's all about the here and now from one person's perspective.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: