Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Civil discourse enlightens us all…
Last week the discussion of the buffer zone for agricultural enterprises on the Bay sparked a number of comments on the stardem.com Web site.
A letter by Thomas T. Alspach of Easton drew a series of comments by jcschmidt and centerline that proved to be a model for enlightened discussion.
“It would be interesting to know, vis-a-vis the talk of our forefathers fighting and property rights and all, how much of the farmed land affected by the buffer squabble is family-owned and farmed, how much is family-owned but leased to others, how much is owned and worked by corporations or agribusinesses and what these arrangements mean to the entities involved in terms of tax breaks, write-offs and other forms of government assistance.,” Centerline wrote.
" Science also has something to say about wastewater and the worsening condition of the Choptank. Check out my comments at Tom Hughes guest commentary in Friday's paper, " jcschmidt said in his reply.
To which centerline said: " I read, and was informed by, jcschmidt's comments on the guest commentary. The impression one takes away from diving at all deeply into the clean water mess is that it may never be resolved. I suspect that keeping things that way has become a profession for too many people.Be that as it may, I'd like to know if jcschmidt agrees with Dr. Fisher's unequivocal view that a buffer strip should be a minimum of 60 feet in width. Yes or no, without reference to any other sources of pollution. "
That prompted jcshmidt to say: " You have me at a disadvantage not having heard Dr. Fisher's "unequivocal" view on buffer strip width firsthand; the next time I see him this will be discussed. Until then I will repeat - the width of buffers relative to the amount of N they keep from getting into the rivers is miniscule compared to other BMP like mandated nutrient management plans…”
These are brief excerpts from their comments, but they indicate a level of civility that I applaud. The comment section on the site should be a place where we can discuss the issues that affect us here on the shore in an enlightened fashion.
The guest comment by Thom Hughes that appeared on February 20th that was referred to by jcschmidt above also was popular with the commenter.
On the other hand, the topic of the Talbot sheriff’s department’s enforcement of the ban on golf carts driving on public roads has drawn a series of sharp comments. The story from February 15 had amassed 15 comments by early last week. Most of the comments took Sheriff Dallas Pope and his staff to task for enforcing the law on a paralyzed Tilghman resident who uses a golf cart on the Tilghman Island Road.
" Crime must be sparse in the county when a deputy has time to beat a dead horse. So let's get a law passed...It is illegal for a police officer to harass a crippled man (forgive me for not being pc), " said debbieann2
Others chimed in to support the paralyzed cart driver.
" This is so horrific I can't believe that the Police Officers in Tilghman would continue to harrass this poor man, sail wrote.
" I think the TC Sheriff's department is taking this whole thing way to far,” citykitty said.
Others took Sheriff Pope personally to task for the repeated enforcement of the ban on golf carts on the road.
But there were some comments in support of the efforts by the police.
" Although I have feeling for this disabled man, as a past law enforcement officer I must look at both sides of the issue. Today everybody is complaining about the deputy but tomorrow if this man was hit by a car, by a drink driver, or else the golf cart stopped on him and he frozen to death then what would everybody be saying?” patchett wrote.
" okay....let him drive a golf cart on the road....where does it end?? could he then take his golf cart out on Rt. 50?,” said carolinecountyresident.
Check out the story to read the complete comments. I don’t pretend to present the entire case made by each commenter. You should check them out yourself.
And while you do that, leave one of your own. We always want to add to the discussion on whatever the topic. A healthy discussion of the issue only enlightens us all.
Next week I plan to talk a bit about changes to our photo gallery area.
As always you can reach me at richardepolk@gmail.com.
Richard Polk is the Online Editor of the Internet version of The Star Democrat. It is located at http://www.stardem.com.
A letter by Thomas T. Alspach of Easton drew a series of comments by jcschmidt and centerline that proved to be a model for enlightened discussion.
“It would be interesting to know, vis-a-vis the talk of our forefathers fighting and property rights and all, how much of the farmed land affected by the buffer squabble is family-owned and farmed, how much is family-owned but leased to others, how much is owned and worked by corporations or agribusinesses and what these arrangements mean to the entities involved in terms of tax breaks, write-offs and other forms of government assistance.,” Centerline wrote.
" Science also has something to say about wastewater and the worsening condition of the Choptank. Check out my comments at Tom Hughes guest commentary in Friday's paper, " jcschmidt said in his reply.
To which centerline said: " I read, and was informed by, jcschmidt's comments on the guest commentary. The impression one takes away from diving at all deeply into the clean water mess is that it may never be resolved. I suspect that keeping things that way has become a profession for too many people.Be that as it may, I'd like to know if jcschmidt agrees with Dr. Fisher's unequivocal view that a buffer strip should be a minimum of 60 feet in width. Yes or no, without reference to any other sources of pollution. "
That prompted jcshmidt to say: " You have me at a disadvantage not having heard Dr. Fisher's "unequivocal" view on buffer strip width firsthand; the next time I see him this will be discussed. Until then I will repeat - the width of buffers relative to the amount of N they keep from getting into the rivers is miniscule compared to other BMP like mandated nutrient management plans…”
These are brief excerpts from their comments, but they indicate a level of civility that I applaud. The comment section on the site should be a place where we can discuss the issues that affect us here on the shore in an enlightened fashion.
The guest comment by Thom Hughes that appeared on February 20th that was referred to by jcschmidt above also was popular with the commenter.
On the other hand, the topic of the Talbot sheriff’s department’s enforcement of the ban on golf carts driving on public roads has drawn a series of sharp comments. The story from February 15 had amassed 15 comments by early last week. Most of the comments took Sheriff Dallas Pope and his staff to task for enforcing the law on a paralyzed Tilghman resident who uses a golf cart on the Tilghman Island Road.
" Crime must be sparse in the county when a deputy has time to beat a dead horse. So let's get a law passed...It is illegal for a police officer to harass a crippled man (forgive me for not being pc), " said debbieann2
Others chimed in to support the paralyzed cart driver.
" This is so horrific I can't believe that the Police Officers in Tilghman would continue to harrass this poor man, sail wrote.
" I think the TC Sheriff's department is taking this whole thing way to far,” citykitty said.
Others took Sheriff Pope personally to task for the repeated enforcement of the ban on golf carts on the road.
But there were some comments in support of the efforts by the police.
" Although I have feeling for this disabled man, as a past law enforcement officer I must look at both sides of the issue. Today everybody is complaining about the deputy but tomorrow if this man was hit by a car, by a drink driver, or else the golf cart stopped on him and he frozen to death then what would everybody be saying?” patchett wrote.
" okay....let him drive a golf cart on the road....where does it end?? could he then take his golf cart out on Rt. 50?,” said carolinecountyresident.
Check out the story to read the complete comments. I don’t pretend to present the entire case made by each commenter. You should check them out yourself.
And while you do that, leave one of your own. We always want to add to the discussion on whatever the topic. A healthy discussion of the issue only enlightens us all.
Next week I plan to talk a bit about changes to our photo gallery area.
As always you can reach me at richardepolk@gmail.com.
Richard Polk is the Online Editor of the Internet version of The Star Democrat. It is located at http://www.stardem.com.
# posted by Richard Polk @ 10:15 AM 
