![]() |
|
Chesapeake Bay settlement has EPA agreeing to enforce pollution reduction goals
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. |
Chesapeake Bay settlement has EPA agreeing to enforce pollution reduction goals
"Wayne.B" wrote in message ... 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. That's a Stalinist organization! Oh wait... |
Chesapeake Bay settlement has EPA agreeing to enforce pollution reduction goals
|
Chesapeake Bay settlement has EPA agreeing to enforce pollutionreduction goals
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... |
Chesapeake Bay settlement has EPA agreeing to enforce pollution reduction goals
On Sat, 9 Oct 2010 00:45:21 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote: 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... 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. |
Chesapeake Bay settlement has EPA agreeing to enforce pollutionreduction goals
On 10/9/10 9:08 AM, Wayne.B 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. It's nice to see you two engaging in political posting. :) -- Republicans are the Party of No: No Leaders / No Ideas / No Morals |
Chesapeake Bay settlement has EPA agreeing to enforce pollutionreduction goals
On Oct 9, 8:08*am, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sat, 9 Oct 2010 00:45:21 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: 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... 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.... |
Chesapeake Bay settlement has EPA agreeing to enforce pollutionreduction goals
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? -- Republicans are the Party of No: No Leaders / No Ideas / No Morals |
Chesapeake Bay settlement has EPA agreeing to enforce pollution reduction goals
"Secular Humouresque" wrote in message m...
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? -- Republicans are the Party of No: No Leaders / No Ideas / No Morals Put a sock in it. Your defeat is imminent. -- 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 |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:28 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com