No danger in Maryland's drinking water
On Oct. 19 you published an Associated Press report stating that dangerously high levels of herbicides are present in drinking water for millions of Americans, including residents of the Chesapeake Bay region.
We feel strongly that the report by the Environmental Working Group and Physicians for Social Responsibility inaccurately portrays drinking water in Maryland as less than safe.
In fact, Marylanders enjoy one of the safest and most plentiful water supplies in the country.
Maryland's strategy for protecting drinking water includes pollution prevention, source protection, system design, construction and operation as well as monitoring to ensure that those elements are functioning properly.
Where needed, the state has authority to require corrective actions, along with technical and financial assistance programs to help in providing solutions.
The report did not highlight that all of the state's public water systems that have been tested are in compliance with Environmental Protection Agency standards for triazine herbicides.
Very shortly, the Department of the Environment will begin testing all of the state's water supplies for a long list of potential contaminants, including these same herbicides. This testing is required by the EPA's drinking water regulations.
Also absent from the report was information showing a 42 percent reduction in the use of triazine herbicides in Maryland over the period of 1985-1991. Stream and river monitoring show an overall decline in base line levels.
These trends are attributed to label restrictions that lower application rates and various Maryland Department of
Agriculture programs to control herbicide use.
David A. C. Carroll
Glen Burnie
=1 The writer is Maryland environment secretary.
School policies
I would like to imperil myself intellectually and respond to Baltimore County School Superintendent Stuart Berger's comments (Perspective section, Dec. 18).
First, Dr. Berger stated that the most important achievement of his reign as superintendent of schools in Baltimore County has been elimination of the seniority system as the primary basis for transferring teachers from school to school.
"Seniority is not in the best interest of kids," said our superintendent.
Transfer by seniority may not be a perfect system. A satisfactory or outstanding teacher was given first shot at openings at a school based on years in the system. Unsatisfactory teachers could not be transferred based on seniority.
Dr. Berger's system is actually injurious to students who need the most help. Let me explain.
A prestigious school like a Dulaney High School now advertises an opening.
Because of its record for academic excellence, many teachers wish to teach there. The principal chooses from many applicants and picks the best.
This outstanding teacher may have the energy and idealism needed to motivate students in a more academically challenging school. He or she is now lost to that school.
The most prestigious schools may skim the cream of the teaching corps, and who would blame them for taking the best?
Politics, cronyism and nepotism have re-arisen under the Berger plan as friends and relatives jockey to get desirable positions.
Next, principals may now get rid of a teacher who is doing a fine job for any number of nebulous reasons, the justification being "the good of the program."
The sad fact is that Dr. Berger's plan is not in the best interest of kids who need the most help.
I can't end without mentioning Dr. Berger's reply to the very serious concern of discipline problems. His "green hair" example is nothing more than a red -- make that green -- herring to divert attention.
Why, for example, do we now have security personnel in at least two high schools? Why did one-third of Randallstown's faculty transfer last year?
Perhaps if Dr. Berger didn't assume that all teachers are his intellectual inferiors, and perhaps if he hired advisers who weren't cowed by his "genius," many of his well-known communications problems would be over.
David G. O'Neill
Cockeysville
Your choice
I would like to respond to the Dec. 12 letter by Malcolm S. Barlow.
Being a community activist for the past 15 years in Southwest Baltimore, I frequently come in contact with local, state and federal politicians.
I have found that most politicians, contrary to public belief, are not crooks and actually do care and work for their constituents. However, there is only so much a present day politician can do without the help and backing of the communities.
To place term limits on these office holders is the same as telling people they may work only 8 to 12 years on their present job, at which time they must resign.
I certainly would not care for that type of restriction on my employment, and I'm certain other people holding jobs would not care for it.
If a person is not satisfied with the representative in office, then I would suggest they find a suitable candidate, organize a campaign and elect the person of your choice.
If no such person can be found, there is always the option of running for office on your own.
Term limits should be regulated at the voting booth, not by law. This system works -- as was proven in the past November elections.
Paul M. Cumberland
Baltimore
The secret of obesity
I have heard any number of theories about America's obesity epidemic, but none has hit upon what seems to me the obvious answer.
Clearly, we cannot blame our genes, since the problem has arisen only in the last generation.
I think the epidemic is related to the disintegration of the American family and -- at the cost of sounding like your great-aunt Matilda -- the disappearance of regular meal times.
People eat on a demand schedule, like infants, and what they eat is the salty, fatty junk food that is available on virtually every street corner.
We are seeing children who have known nothing else than snacking, grabbing a bite, gulping down food on the run.
And to some degree, this is a social, class phenomenon. You don't find fat people in the city business districts or in the enclaves of the wealthy.
The $20 lunch of sole and tiny carrots has probably less than a quarter the calories of the $2.99 hamburger and fries.
We can't all be rich, but what we can do is stabilize our meal times, maybe even eat at home now and then.
Michael Kernan
Baltimore