Get unlimited digital access to $0.99 for 4 weeks.
News Opinion Readers Respond

Immigration's environmental impact deserves greater study

The main point to be drawn from Tom Horton's article about immigration's impact on the Chesapeake Bay region is that there's no way to separate population problems from environmental problems, and vice versa ("Immigration's impact," Sept. 3).

Advocates for both issues have failed to acknowledge this fact for far too long, but the hot-button issue of immigration makes it impossible for them to continue to maintain their distance.

As Mr. Horton noted, whatever the merits of immigration reform, immigration will remain the primary factor in U.S. population growth, which, if present rates continue, will swell from our present 315 million to some 445 million by mid-century.

This cannot help but put enormous pressure not only on the Chesapeake Bay area, but on all of the nation's natural habitats, and by extension, our social and economic well-being as well.

It is interesting to note that while the federal government sees fit to promulgate environmental and immigration policies, it shies away from doing so when it comes to population policy.

Given the current situation, this is clearly wrong-headed. At the very least, we should have a national Commission on Population to assess the impact not only of immigration, but every social and economic development that may impact population growth.

Howard Bluth, Baltimore

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Cleaner waters mean safer children
    Cleaner waters mean safer children

    A key consideration has always been missing from the debate over funding for cleaning up stormwater damaged waterways and the "rain tax" ("Backtracking on the bay," Jan. 23). All Maryland homes are but a short walk from the nearest waterway. For many, the nearest waterway is a small headwater...

  • The Hogan environmental agenda
    The Hogan environmental agenda

    In appointing former Harford County Executive David Craig to head Maryland's planning department last week, Gov.-elect Larry Hogan acknowledged he's sensitive to criticism of anti-sprawl policies collectively known as "smart growth." He promised to "take a look at" the complaints of local...

  • Ship ballast a major source of pollution
    Ship ballast a major source of pollution

    The Chesapeake Bay Foundation was gracious in giving the polluted waters of the Chesapeake Bay a D-plus. It should have been an F-minus ("Bay grade remains D+ despite improvements," Jan. 5). A major culprit involved with the bay's increased pollution is the shipping industry.

  • Big Chicken must help pay for bay cleanup
    Big Chicken must help pay for bay cleanup

    Dan Rodricks was right on the mark that Maryland's next governor needs to address pollution from agriculture and "consider some common-sense ideas for dealing with the phosphorous runoff." ("Larry Hogan has a chance to be a green governor," Dec. 13).

  • Excess phosphorous is killing the bay
    Excess phosphorous is killing the bay

    In the days following Dan Rodricks' column "Larry Hogan has a chance to be a green governor" (Dec. 13), your paper has been flooded with letters opposing the phosphorus management tool (PMT) regulations and opposing Mr. Rodricks position. On the surface it would seem that both letters in...

  • Mr. Hogan picks the wrong 'first fight'
    Mr. Hogan picks the wrong 'first fight'

    When farmers' own records show they are spreading far more phosphorus on their fields than is needed to fertilize their crops and studies have demonstrated conclusively that nutrient runoff from those same fields is killing the Chesapeake Bay, attention must be paid. Yet Maryland's incoming...