Dribs and drabs of advice on the drought
In all my years living in Baltimore, I never thought we would have a serious water problem. At times in the past, some water restrictions would be imposed during hot weather, but this was infrequent and never a hardship.
Now for the first time I am purchasing bottled water and treating it like gold. Although I never wasted water, I felt free to use it as I pleased.
Now, I am constantly trying to find methods to save water.
In the past, I always let the water run when I washed dishes by hand. Now, dishwashing takes time because I no longer let the water run.
Washing clothes is a chore now, because only doing full loads takes planning and I must keep extra clothes on hand while I build a full load of wash.
I keep hair washing and drawing bath water at a very low level. My household cleaning has suffered, because I have not figured out how to clean every room with dirty water.
I have pet cats and feed a few strays. I recycle the cans from their food. These need to be washed before going out. Without letting the water run, this can be very time-consuming.
The bottom line is that I have less time now because of the drought. And the prospect of this shortage problem getting more severe concerns me very much.
I feel so sorry for the farmers who depend on water for their crops and for their livelihood. What happens when they cannot grow food for us because of the shortage of water?
In this age when we can get almost anything we want when we want it, I find it very sobering to think about what would we do if our water and food supply would dwindle to a point where it could not be quickly replenished.
Gerry Fincham
Baltimore
I think the water-use restrictions are needed and have been for a while. We have been in this drought for a while, so the shortage shouldn't have been a surprise to our leaders.
But if the restrictions had begun months ago, they would not need to be so drastic. We could have saved millions of gallons by watering lawns on alternate days -- and would not now be in this frenzy of cheating and tattling.
I also think the "water police" is a waste of our officers' time. I would rather have a water cheater get away with sprinkling his or her lawn than an armed robber get away because an officer was busy getting a hose turned off.
Communities could themselves monitor water use. Homeowner's associations could impose fines and neighbors could use peer pressure.
And saving water should not be a new thing to anyone.
I have always conserved water by taking showers instead of baths, turning the water off when brushing my teeth, not letting faucets drip, washing dishes in the sink instead of the dishwasher, washing full loads of laundry, not letting the hose run continuously while washing the car and timing lawn watering.
Though the restrictions have caused my lawn to die, my flowers and young trees are doing fine, because I water them with recycled water from showers and dish rinsing.
Everyone needs to keep in mind that conserving water isn't a punishment, but a necessity.
If you want a green lawn, buy lawn paint. Every gallon you "cheat" onto your lawn is one gallon less we may have to drink down the line.
Jane M. Usero
Ellicott City
We live in a rural area, where we built our own house with a drilled well in March 1955. Our well was drilled during a dry summer, but the driller still could not bail it dry. He thought we'd never have a water problem and so did we.
Guess what? Our well recently went dry.
We are now hauling water from friend's houses, taking our laundry out, leaving the lid off the commode tank (so we can easily dump water in for the flush), heating water on the stove for our baths and dishes and buying bottled water for drinking and cooking.
It is nice that we have good friends and can do all these things, but what has happened to the water that has never been a problem for 44 years?
People with wells, be careful: This could happen to your well.
Isabelle Stearn
Havre de Grace
I live in a row house in Southwest Baltimore and the drought has affected my family in many ways.
We don't see the neighborhood kids playing with hoses in their back yards or filling up their plastic swimming pools.
In front, no one is washing cars or hosing down the pavement. The marble steps on many houses are dirty; nobody comes to wash them anymore.
Outdoor fountains in the city parks are shut down. Some service stations and public buildings have closed their restrooms to the public.
Personally, I now shave in the shower, drink less water and feel guilty if I happen to waste good water.
Philip A. Thayer
Baltimore
Conservation is not a popular concept these days: just look at the large new homes and the increasing size of vehicles. But because of one of the worst droughts of the century, the governor has mandated water conservation.
How can we save this most precious resource? Stop watering the lawn, even after the ban is lifted. Watering lawns is probably the biggest waste of water -- as well as time and money.
Most well-established lawns survive dry spells, even droughts; they usually bounce back after the first soaking rain.
Another way to save water is to put a bucket under the faucet when letting the water run to reach the correct bath or shower temperature. You can also save water from the washing machine, the dehumidifer and the air conditioner and use it to water plants.
We can also stop flushing the toilet every time we use it and rinsing dishes before putting them in the dishwasher.
If you stop and think each time you use water, you can find more conservation ideas. It's true: Necessity is the mother of invention.
The drought restrictions have taught me to use water carefully. I hope others are doing the same.
Shirley Carl
Towson
The Sun's "Question of the Month" alluded to "water police" looking for those who violate water-use restrictions.
We have no "water police." However, some people seem to believe that the current water restrictions are not intended for them, but for others. The police should arrest and fine them.
I accumulate air conditioner run-off water in a washtub and use it to water my plants and wash my car. I have not watered my lawn in three years.
However, water is being misused by professional sports corporations to water playing fields. And others, such as golf course owners, complain they are disadvantaged by the restrictions and want to waste thousands of gallons of water a day.
Wake up everybody: Without water we cease to exist and with our current water usage, combined with minimal rainfall, we could end up turning the water tap and getting only air.
Richard Weber
Randallstown
As my father, who is now retired, made his living by purifying water, I grew up with the knowledge that water is precious.
Now, my husband and I live in Kingsville. Our only source of water is an underground spring, flowing through an old pump house.
When we lose power and the pump ceases to run I am reminded of my childhood days, when Dad would lecture us on why we should cherish water and care for this great, wonderful stuff -- and never, never take it for granted.
As early as June, my husband and I started to cut our water use.
Our flowerbeds were the first to feel the pinch. It wasn't until the last geranium and Black-eyed Susan had shriveled that I realized the hummingbirds and honeybees had departed in search of the nectar they need.
Next, we stopped watering the corn. It wasn't filling out anyway, and we figured the moisture the dry stalks were absorbing could be more beneficial to the rows of beans. The tomato and squash plants have continued to get their daily share of water we haul up from the stream.
But the stream's flow is carefully monitored. If it dries up, the horses will have nothing to drink.
By mid-August, we stopped all hose-watering of vegetables. We now check the water level in the pump house every evening. We use bottled water for coffee, for iced tea, for the dog.
Any water we use to can what few vegetables have come in is cooled and carried to the garden. And, as always, we turn off the shower until it is time to rinse and flush the toilets only when necessary.
If I happened upon someone breaking the rules by sprinkling a lawn all night or washing a car in the moonlight, I don't think it would evoke anger. Rather, I would hope such a selfish act would make one ashamed of oneself, ashamed enough to stop such rapacious behavior.
I simply feel sorry for anyone who is unable to grasp the wisdom of sharing and the value of one, exquisite drop of water.
Katherine M. Ambrose
Kingsville
A needed step back on dredge dumping
The commissioners of Queen Anne's County are proud that our efforts, and those of so many citizens of our county and other Eastern and Western Shore counties, have delayed the Maryland Port Administration's plans for open-bay dumping of dredge spoils.
We were also pleased to see the opposition to the project expressed by federal and state elected officials, as well as by federal agencies responsible for our environment and natural resources.
The views of citizens of Queen Anne's County and throughout the state drive our continued efforts to oppose open-water dumping of dredge spoils anywhere in the Chesapeake Bay.
The consensus of citizens, as expressed during the public hearings regarding Site 104, is that enough is enough: Open-bay dumping must stop.
But this is an ongoing battle. Site 104 is not off the dumping list.
Our position is that the long-term costs to the bay, the people who earn their livelihood on the water and the recreational fisheries are far greater than the short-term savings.
Therefore, we will continue to oppose open-bay dumping until it is eliminated from the state's 20-year plan, which also includes three other dumping locations.
Queen Anne's County's comments on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Site 104 project were prepared, in part, by the internationally respected environmental consulting and engineering firm of ARCADIS, Geraghty & Miller (AGM).
AGM's critique of the proposal exposes failures to follow proper testing and evaluation protocol, scientifically unsupportable assumptions and data substitutions in preparation of the computer model used in the DEIS.
The critique also points out that dredge-spoil dumping at Site 104 will result in significant increases in nitrogen releases into the bay. This problem applies to all open-bay dumping projects -- and it runs contrary to the state's goal of reducing nitrogen emissions to the bay by 40 percent.
The DEIS itself states that the Site 104 proposal does not comply with the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act and the Coastal Zone Management Act.
Additionally, the current plans conflict with the Port Administration and the Corps' opposition to open-bay dumping, when they supported the Hart-Miller Island project more than 20 years ago.
Queen Anne's County opposes spending further tax dollars studying open-bay dumping. As the state decided more than 20 years ago, such dumping must cease.
We acknowledge that dredging the approach channels to the Baltimore Harbor is vital to the state's economy. The thousands who depend on the Port of Baltimore deserve well-planned, sensible dredge spoil disposal options that secure their future.
Queen Anne's County supports keeping the shipping channels open. We simply want smart disposal solutions instead of cheap ones.
We would like to recognize the support of neighboring counties -- Kent, Talbot, Caroline, Dorchester and Anne Arundel -- whose governing bodies have also adopted resolutions opposing open-bay dumping.
This is not a Queen Anne's County issue. This is an issue for the entire Chesapeake Bay.
George M. O'Donnell
Centreville
Mr. O'Donnell is president of the Queen Anne's County commissioners. The letter was also signed by the county's other commissioners.
'Gothic yes; Bauhaus no'
In reply to Edward Gunts' assessment of the planned University of Maryland Law School facade ("A building of Gothic proportions," Aug. 15) I say, Gothic yes, Bauhaus, no.
"Modernism" is a waning period style -- one derived from the Bauhaus in Germany in the 1920s. It's an empty and spiritless style whose day is over.
Modernism's philosophy had us live like machines, in boxes. It has succeeded in that objective, and in that alone. It has given us no great buildings -- unless one considers the corner Rite Aid or the Wal-Mart or Charles Center complex examples of greatness.
Since the 1960s and the beginning of the New Age movement, many of us longed for surroundings that express our spirit. Having no "modern" style that expresses any sanity, we have sought designs from earlier periods in which eternal values and proportions were apparent.
What previous generations recognized, and we seem to have lost, is our sense of the beautiful and the eternal.
Where are America's Parthenons? Old Victorian buildings seem to be as close as we get.
Earlier generations of artists and architects recognized that interior and exterior spaces that followed eternal proportions were lasting and visually pleasing -- and that their proportions shaped and reflected the spirituality of the people within them.
They understood that the world need not be reinvented every five years because of a distorted idea of progress.
Modernism, on the other hand, is no tradition. It's a spiritually disordered break from the past that traps us in a sterile present.
To learn a lesson in how environment shapes culture, I suggest a trip to Paris. Last time I heard, schoolchildren were not shooting each other there.
Locally, a trip to Ellicott City is instructive. A walk downtown shows what a small town should look like. Most of the buildings are made of wood or stone, built to last hundreds of years and decorated with elements from the Greek and Roman world.
Returning to the main roads after leaving Ellicott City, one finds the disharmonious product of 50 years of sprawl and "modern" architectural forms.
My objection to the law school building is that it will not be Gothic enough.
It will be banal because the builders seem unwilling to go enough against the corporate modernist grain to make the building truly Gothic, beautiful and spectacular.
The latest architectural style is not necessarily the best. If I am to be trapped in the past, I'd prefer it to be in the Middle Ages, when man searched for God, rather than the 1920s, when we were thought to be machines.
Allen Holden
Baltimore
Proof that protection is working
Critics of the Endangered Species Act need to look no farther than Baltimore to see how this important law is working.
The peregrine falcon, a raptor known for its speed and hunting prowess, has nested on the Legg Mason building near Baltimore's Inner Harbor for two decades. On Aug. 19, U.S. Department of the Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt announced that the peregrine falcon has recovered nationally and no longer is considered "endangered" ("Falcon soars from list of the imperiled," Aug. 20).
Peregrine falcon numbers plummeted across the country following World War II. The major cause was DDT and related organochloride pesticides, which contaminated the food of peregrines and other large birds of prey and caused them to lay eggs with shells too thin to withstand the weight of incubating parent birds.
When the Environmental Defense Fund in 1967 began its long but ultimately successful court battle to ban DDT, the peregrine falcon was not found within hundreds of miles of Baltimore. At one point, just 39 falcon pairs remained. East of the Mississippi River, the peregrine had vanished.
The 1972 ban on DDT was an essential milestone for peregrine recovery, but it was only the beginning. Peregrine falcons did not reoccupy their former territory on their own.
Their return was accomplished under the Endangered Species Act's mandate -- and the list of credits for their return rivals that of any Hollywood blockbuster.
The Peregrine Fund bred and released thousands of birds. Other raptor groups and state agencies made major contributions. Rock climbers, retired couples and other volunteers donated thousands of hours to monitor reintroduced falcons.
In several cities, building owners, property managers and transportation departments rescheduled cleaning and repair work for skyscrapers and bridges to avoid disturbing nesting peregrines.
These contributions became important as post-DDT generations expanded beyond historic peregrine mountain cliff habitats to raise their young on ledges and nest boxes on high buildings, bridges and power plants.
Today more than 1,650 peregrine pairs nest in the United States, raising their fluffy white chicks in habitats as diverse as the cliffs of Maine's Acadia National Park, the smokestacks of Midwestern power plants and the skyscrapers of Manhattan.
They capture prey (mostly smaller birds but also bats) and circle the skies above the eager eyes of city dwellers and mountain hikers.
What have we learned from the peregrine's splendid return from the brink? First, placement on the endangered species list does not have to be a one-way ticket to extinction. Second, both government action and private initiative can contribute to species recovery.
Regulatory actions can be crucial -- as the reproductive success of the peregrines and other birds of prey after the banning of DDT shows.
The Endangered Species Act also plays an essential role on several fronts -- funding recovery efforts, protecting habitat, prohibiting shooting and other forms of harm and providing an imperiled species enough visibility to stimulate rescue efforts.
Endangered species do matter to the American public.
The many contributions to the peregrine's recovery and the popularity of Baltimore's successful falcons show that endangered species are not the expensive indulgence of a small elite group, but an important part of our natural heritage that enriches all our lives.
Margaret McMillan
Michael Bean
Washington
The writers work for the wildlife program of the Environmental Defense Fund.