On 10/9/10 12:17 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 09 Oct 2010 09:15:52 -0400, Secular Humouresque
wrote:

On 10/9/10 9:11 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 9, 8:08 am, wrote:
On Sat, 9 Oct 2010 00:45:21 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Oct 7, 3:25 pm, wrote:
Chesapeake Bay settlement has EPA agreeing to enforce pollution
reduction goals:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/11/AR201...

This will have wide ranging implications for the bay, hopefully for
the better.

I was wondering why they waited so long to take any action...

It will cost money to change current practices and the agricultural
businesses in and around the Chesapeake tributaries wield an enormous
amount of political power.

Yeah, I can understand that....


So...*some* political discussions are OK, eh, such as a discussion about
agribusiness? Or is it corporate pollution?

This is not really a political posting if you ever put your boat in
the water. Boaters should be interested in the water they boat in,
particularly if they fish or swim.


Just about anything having to do with pollution abatement is political,
tim. Forcing the heavy pollutors around the Bay to clean up their acts
*is* political.

The outcome may be good for boaters, but the process is as political as
it gets. There are politics involved in many, many aspects of pleasure
boating.

--
Republicans are the Party of No:
No Leaders / No Ideas / No Morals

On Oct 9, 11:23*am, Secular Humouresque wrote:
On 10/9/10 12:17 PM, wrote:



On Sat, 09 Oct 2010 09:15:52 -0400, Secular Humouresque
*wrote:

On 10/9/10 9:11 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 9, 8:08 am, * wrote:
On Sat, 9 Oct 2010 00:45:21 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Oct 7, 3:25 pm, * wrote:
Chesapeake Bay settlement has EPA agreeing to enforce pollution
reduction goals:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/11/AR201...

This will have wide ranging implications for the bay, hopefully for
the better.

I was wondering why they waited so long to take any action...

It will cost money to change current practices and the agricultural
businesses in and around the Chesapeake *tributaries wield an enormous
amount of political power.

Yeah, I can understand that....

So...*some* political discussions are OK, eh, such as a discussion about
agribusiness? Or is it corporate pollution?

This is not really a political posting if you ever put your boat in
the water. Boaters should be interested in the water they boat in,
particularly if they fish or swim.

Just about anything having to do with pollution abatement is political, tim.

I think you're actually addressing Greg, harry.

On 10/10/10 6:18 PM, I am Tosk wrote:


snerk Try racing motorcycles .....with kids! I would guess
probably 80%+ racing parents, and adult racers, young adult racers are
conservative, with some Libertarians and very few so called
"progressives".. [not a scientific survey;]


And once again, little man tosk turns a boating discussion into a
motorcycle discussion *and* inserts politics.



--
I'm not a warlock…I'm…you!

"Secular Humouresque" wrote in message m...
On 10/10/10 6:18 PM, I am Tosk wrote:


snerk Try racing motorcycles .....with kids! I would guess
probably 80%+ racing parents, and adult racers, young adult racers are
conservative, with some Libertarians and very few so called
"progressives".. [not a scientific survey;]


And once again, little man tosk turns a boating discussion into a
motorcycle discussion *and* inserts politics.



--
I'm not a warlock…I'm…you!


Thanks. You be sure to keep us informed of all transgressions of this sort.

--
I'm the real Harry, and I post from a PC or a MAC, as virtually everyone knows.
If a post is attributed to me, and it isn't from a PC or a MAC, it's from an ID
spoofer who hasn't the balls to post with his current ID.

The magnificent Boatless Harry

On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 16:25:26 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

Chesapeake Bay settlement has EPA agreeing to enforce pollution
reduction goals:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/11/AR2010051105212.html

This will have wide ranging implications for the bay, hopefully for
the better.

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation has been fighting tooth and nail for the EPA to do
their job. They're a good place to make a donation of some of that loose money
laying around!

http://www.cbf.org/Page.aspx?pid=1000
--
John H

All decisions are the result of binary thinking.

On 10/11/10 8:02 AM, John H wrote:
On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 16:25:26 -0400,
wrote:

Chesapeake Bay settlement has EPA agreeing to enforce pollution
reduction goals:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/11/AR2010051105212.html

This will have wide ranging implications for the bay, hopefully for
the better.

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation has been fighting tooth and nail for the EPA to do
their job. They're a good place to make a donation of some of that loose money
laying around!

http://www.cbf.org/Page.aspx?pid=1000


You can be sure "corporate interests" will do everything in their power
to interfere with and halt enforcement.

--
I'm not a warlock . . . I'm you!

In article 6519e0a7-eb02-4f00-b70e-f344d5a5af94@
28g2000yqm.googlegroups.com, says...

On Oct 7, 3:25*pm, Wayne.B wrote:
Chesapeake Bay settlement has EPA agreeing to enforce pollution
reduction goals:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/11/AR201...

This will have wide ranging implications for the bay, hopefully for
the better.

I was wondering why they waited so long to take any action...

I've told everyone here what a paradise the Chesapeake is because I live
here and anywhere I don't live is almost inhabitable. Just because it is
a large sewer doesn't matter.