Letter: False impression
In the Feb. 7th edition, Mathews Mirror section, the headline read "Chesapeake Bay report shows a resilient ecosystem." To some, that may be boring stuff and at a quick glance, may sound like the Chesapeake Bay program is on the right track and making real restoration progress. So it’s accepted and many often move on to other more interesting topics of the day, like sports or something. At a closer read, it doesn’t seem as resilient after all.
In fact, that very day, I happened to read in the February edition of Virginia Business (that was in the Virginian-Pilot) that told a totally different story. It said, "In its annual ‘State of the Bay’ report, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation gave the ecosystem an overall score of 32 out of 100—meaning the largest estuary in North America continues to get a failing grade. Still, the environmental group pointed out that its overall score in 2012 was one point higher than in the past report and four points higher than in 2009."
Now does the director think that is encouraging? We have been pumping taxpayer dollars into this for over 25 years and we are still failing? So now, the government or other NGOs develop a program that involve TMDL limits and other regulations that cost who-knows how much, that can’t be explained in layman terms to the citizens, and in the end, don’t know if it will even work. Again, I ask, is that encouraging?
The headline created a false impression for sure and sadly, once in place, these programs are irreversible. I truly don’t know what to think about this but it sounds like we are throwing part after part on this repair. At what point is the money too much?