Try digitalPLUS for 10 days for only $0.99

Readers Respond

News Opinion Readers Respond

The poultry industry's dirty secret [Letter]

I was disgusted to read Bill Satterfield's wrongly titled commentary on the poultry industry's role in Chesapeake Bay pollution ("Md. farmers are wrongly blamed for bay troubles," March 13).

The handful of large chicken companies like Perdue on the Eastern Shore are not "farmers." They are large corporate entities that take the lion's share of the profits and leave their own contract growers to deal with the problems caused by the chicken manure they generate. It's a way of distancing the corporations from the waste and degradation their system creates.

Mr. Satterfield throws a lot of numbers around to try to confuse the issue, but it's really quite simple: You can't have more than 300 million chickens concentrated in a geographic area the size of the Delmarva Peninsula without creating more manure than the ecosystem can handle.

Mr. Satterfield also fails to mention the unique and very advantageous relationships Perdue and other large chicken companies have with their growers. The companies control all aspects of the contract, own the birds and their feed, and dictate every aspect of the process of growing the birds. By design, the only thing they don't own is the waste — dead chickens and manure.

If Mr. Satterfield and the large poultry companies he speaks for really cared about Maryland farmers, they would take the responsibility of dealing with the pollution runoff from chicken manure off the farmers' shoulders instead of using them as props to hide behind.

Jeff Dicken, Baltimore

To respond to this letter, send an email to Please include your name and contact information.

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Support Clean Water Act

    Support Clean Water Act

    On the 42nd anniversary of the Clean Water Act, a new report from Environment America, "Waterways Restored," highlights the success the law has meant for the Anacostia River, taking it from a state of horrific pollution to giving some hope that it will be safe for swimming and fishing in little...

  • Damming the bay's pollution

    Damming the bay's pollution

    Here's the gist of the recent report by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on the Conowingo Dam: Don't confuse a red herring with a red tide. The notion that all the pollution woes of the Chesapeake Bay could be heaped on one 86-year-old hydroelectric facility on the Lower Susquehanna River was ludicrous...

  • How about aerators to clean up the bay?

    How about aerators to clean up the bay?

    I just read the article about dredging the Susquehanna River, and I couldn't help thinking back to the Seoul Olympics where they used aerators to clean up their filthy water and they got it clean enough that all of the rowing events were held in very safe water ("Study: Dredging little help to...

  • All Maryland's waterways deserve protection

    All Maryland's waterways deserve protection

    The Clean Water Act has brought progress to the Chesapeake Bay, but in order to continue the bay on the path to success we must protect all the waterways in Maryland, including the Anacostia River ("Close Clean Water Act loophole," Nov. 12).

  • 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 release...

  • 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 that...