A different perspective on 'That dam silt' [Letter]

Your editorial "That dam silt" expresses opinions by a group of non-experts, including newspaper editors, who may be shooting from the hip, or lip. My turn!

When the Conowingo Dam was being built, the governor of Maryland was criticized for allowing an out-of-state company build a dam on Maryland waters. The governor was elected for three terms as there were no term limits, so it would appear, the voters of Maryland didn't oppose the dam construction.


If you study history, it appears that the builders of the dam made deals with politicians that benefited Maryland taxpayers.

Silt is the whipping topic of the moment. Silt would exist with or without the dam. Rain tax and state regulation of farm pollution on he Bay are also popular topics of the moment.

"Clean silt" may not have an adverse effect on the bay but "dirty silt" takes a toll?

The actions of people cause litter and storm water run-off, etc.

Farmers are opposed to state regulation as it has an adverse impact on their livelihood; Bay waterman are in favor of federal regulations that benefit them.

Why didn't the Eastern Shore watermen criticize Maryland politicians for failure to implement regulations on farmers, including their Eastern Shore farmers brothers, whose manure and fertilizer run off probably causes distress to life in the Bay?

Isn't the bay problem causes by a multitude of sources? Why should one industry be singled out?

The dam owners will have a toll extracted by politicians, but this will not clean up the multitude of sources of the problem.

Until one unified authority in federal, takes charge, the many of states that surround the Bay will continue to have an impact.

Regulations vary from state to state and the problems will continue. The Rain Tax is wrong because it is a state tax; storm water run-off regulations and enforcement belong at the federal level and should be taken out of federal taxes.

Curtis Pace