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

New phosphorous rules not ready for prime time [Letter]

Before The Sun and its readers start hyperventilating about the Maryland Department of Agriculture's decision to delay (not abandon) the proposed Phosphorous Management Tool regulation, it is important to share some insights into this common-sense decision ("Phosphorous rules delayed," Nov. 22).

First, the department's actions are not rolling back any environmental protection program. Since 2005, farmers throughout the state have had state-mandated limits on the amount of phosphorus they can apply to their land, whether it is animal manure or commercial fertilizer. Interestingly, Maryland farmers are not even given credit for these improvements in the Environmental Protection Agency's Chesapeake Bay Model that is driving all water-quality programs in the state.

Many farmers, chicken growers, business owners, Eastern Shore county government officials and state legislators believe the proposed regulation, as drafted, would have serious financial implications throughout the state with negligible environmental improvements.

Granted, the MDA offered assistance to help farmers cope with the new system of fertilizer applications. But the offer was short on details and there was concern that more time was needed to make this drastic transition.

None of us were asking for a complete abandonment of the new tool. We simply were asking for more time to allow an orderly transition, to have alternative uses of manure in place and to give farmers time to adjust their business models.

When the groundbreaking Maryland Water Quality Improvement Act of 1998 was enacted, there was a multiyear transition period to allow adjustments to farming operations. We simply are asking for such a phase-in period for this new regulation.

I am especially disturbed by The Sun's insinuation that the state's decision to allow a phase-in was due to politics and Gov. Martin O'Malley's long time acquaintance with an attorney who works for Perdue Farms.

Such misguided allegations ignore the fact that more than 800 people attended two public briefings on the proposed regulation, and the only people who supported the rule were a few state employees. Similarly, nearly all of the 500 comments submitted during the 30-day public comment period were opposed to the proposed regulation.

When the state enacts a new regulation of such sweeping consequence, it needs to be well thought out, properly prepared and effective in improving water quality. The proposed regulation was not ready for enactment. We need to get things done right rather than just done soon.

Sen. Richard F. Colburn, Cambridge

The writer, a Republican, represents Caroline, Dorchester, Talbot and Wicomico counties in the Maryland Senate.

-
To respond to this letter, send an email to talkback@baltimoresun.com. Please include your name and contact information.

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Big ships on the Chesapeake Bay follow strict environmental safety rules
    Big ships on the Chesapeake Bay follow strict environmental safety rules

    Please allow me to correct some of the points letter writer Bernard Helinski recently made regarding ships' ballast water polluting the Chesapeake Bay ("Ship ballast a major source of pollution," Jan. 7).

  • Phosphorus rules, finally
    Phosphorus rules, finally

    As we have chided Gov. Martin O'Malley more than once on this page for dragging his feet on regulations intended to reduce the amount of polluting phosphorus pouring into the Chesapeake Bay from farms, it's only fair to herald his decision to move forward with the rules. That he chose to...

  • A farmer's perspective on phosphorous management
    A farmer's perspective on phosphorous management

    From the time I graduated from college and returned to the farm, I have been dealing with government regulations, environmental extremists and animal rights activists.

  • Could O'Malley's cover crop program be increasing animal waste in the bay?
    Could O'Malley's cover crop program be increasing animal waste in the bay?

    Gov. Martin O'Malley's green agenda really is green ("O'Malley rushes to propose new pollution rules," Nov. 14). Green as the goose waste that pours directly into the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, mostly during the waterfowl season. And, it's primarily fed by Mr. O'Malley's very own cover...

  • O'Malley sticks it to farmers on his way out the door
    O'Malley sticks it to farmers on his way out the door

    On behalf of 36,000 Maryland Farm Bureau families, I have to disagree with your editorial on the issue of the new phosphorus rules ("Phosphorus rules, finally," Nov. 18). Gov. Martin O'Malley did not get it right. In fact, this is effectively just one last tax increase he is trying to force...

  • Denying Conowingo permit won't clean bay
    Denying Conowingo permit won't clean bay

    While I understand the concern about accumulated nutrient buildup in the sediment upstream of the Conowingo Dam posing a hazard to the health of the Chesapeake Bay, as an engineer I do not see what the operation of the dam's power station has anything to do with it ("Maryland can enforce dam...

  • Dam cleanup too costly
    Dam cleanup too costly

    Regarding the recent commentary about the Conowingo Dam ("Maryland can enforce dam cleanup," Nov. 19), Bob Irvin is correct for the most part. However, let's keep in mind that the Conowingo is a man-made obstruction to sediment, leaves and tree logs that Mother Nature really intended to go to...

  • Hogan needs to reverse O'Malley's onerous farm rules
    Hogan needs to reverse O'Malley's onerous farm rules

    In what will be seen as one of soon-to-be ex-Gov. Martin O'Malley's parting shots to the incoming Hogan administration, Mr. O'Malley is pushing through new regulations controlling how farmers fertilize their land ("O'Malley rushes to propose new pollution rules," Nov. 15). Never mind the fact...

Comments
Loading