So maybe they should focus more on pollution across State lines.
This is what the EPA is for
Published
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum
A place for civil discussion of the events of the day for Tidewater residents without the limitations imposed by media forums.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
You’re right, Don. It one of many things the EPA should focus on. And instead of rolling back regulations on polluters, they should be enforcing the ones they inherited. Drop the redundant ones, and stop giving breaks to companies that are doing serious harm to our environment and not paying the proce.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Few, if any, laws and the ensuing regulations regarding the environment are passed unanimously. So they all have compromises. Some might go a bit far and other not far enough when it comes to protection of land, water, air and wildlife.
In my opinion, erring in the direction of conservation is better. That can be eased as knowledge and consequences progress. Much harder to undo damage, particularly if it is in the interest of profit to continue on a destructive path.
Ironically it is the conservative viewpoint that seems to not want conservation.
IMHO
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “This is what the EPA is for”
I’d rather the EPA be for even less, possibly retreating from it’s purported regulatory function to serve only in a scientific advisory role.
When you consider that the menace of municipal sewage and the engineering required to deal with it have been well understood for at least 2,000 years, or that the technology to process raw sewage into safe effluent, even drinking water, has existed for more than a century, it is astonishing that even one ounce of toxic sewage can enter the Chesapeake Bay at any point in the entire watershed.
Clearly, the EPA is not doing its job as a regulatory agency. I suspect that interstate lawsuits might be a better approach to stemming sewage pollution of the Bay.
Source
History of water supply and sanitation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_water_supply_and_sanitation#Wastewater_reuse_activities
LikeLike
…”to serve only in a scientific advisory role.”…
That might work of all of the scientists aren’t being chased away by an administration that tends to ignore science.
https://nypost.com/2017/12/22/hundreds-have-quit-the-epa-since-trump-took-office/ (December 2017)
There were other articles found, but none later than this one. From 20 MONTHS ago.
” the EPA is not doing its job as a regulatory agency. ” When the 2 heads are anti-regulation zealots and fossil fuel lobbyists, isn’t it clear as to the why?
LikeLike
The EPA went astray when it put too much of it’s efforts into chasing CO2, the great majority of which is outside its jurisdiction, something that will increasingly be the case, and let problems like sewerage flowing down the Susquehana slip by for decades.
LikeLike
RE: “That might work of all of the scientists aren’t being chased away by an administration that tends to ignore science.”
Your link doesn’t support your premise. No where does it mention scientists. Only attorneys and managers.
The retreat from regulation to science that I would favor may already be underway, and all for the good, since the regulators aren’t even solving basic problems.
LikeLike
It mentions over 200 scientists. If that link doesn’t show that number there are several others I could pull from. I chose the NYP because it is usually an outlet I down check, except for its sports reporting.
LikeLike