Welcome to our weekly column in which a topic of interest, piece of news, relevant opinion, or general request for feedback is presented. We’ll offer the topic du jour and accompanying question, and you have the opportunity to respond with your thoughts.
Simply fill out the form below. A collection of each week’s responses will appear in the following week’s column. To read last week’s responses, scroll below this week’s topic.
Publisher reserves the right to edit responses for clarity and publish online and/or in our print publications.
Please let us know your thoughts!
This week’s topic is:
Contradictions in Bay Health Reporting?
Last week, the Chesapeake Bay Program released its 2021 Blue Crab Advisory Report, which concludes that “the overall Chesapeake Bay blue crab population is not being overfished and is not depleted.” Experts from the Chesapeake Bay Stock Assessment Committee reviewed the results from the annual Bay-wide Winter Dredge Survey (released in May 2021 by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources and the Virginia Institute of Marine Science) and harvest figures from the previous seasons to provide an in-depth picture of the Chesapeake’s blue crab population and to make suggestions for any needed changes to regulations.
This Winter Dredge Survey actually found that the blue crab population (males and females alike of all ages) in the Bay decreased from 405 million in 2020 to 282 million in 2021. Experts attribute this decline to be in large part due to the juvenile blue crab population—crabs that will grow to harvestable size next year—which is estimated to be 86 million, down from 185 million in 2020.
Though the report diligently offers the science and reasoning of an overall healthy and positive outlook for the blue crab population, as well as recommends zero change to commercial harvesting, on the surface, this report seems to contradict itself. Blue crab numbers sharply declined from 2020 to 2021. Yet no substantial changes are recommended.
Similarly, last week the Maryland Department of Natural Resources loosened its commercial oyster harvest season by opening harvesting to five days per week (up from four), citing an improving harvestable oyster population. Yet, according to the science, oysters were actually overfished in 2020. Bay environmental advocates say opening up oyster fishery to even more harvest will do greater harm to an already historically over-depleted species and will negatively impact the overall Bay’s health/water quality.
Our questions to you:
Is state leadership listening to the science or manipulating it in favor of commercial interests?
Please share your thoughts by filling out this form.
Last week, we asked you about the HALT Drunk Driving Act and you responded! Here is a sampling of reader responses. To read more, click here.
I'm definitely in favor of this requirement. The number of drunk driving accidents each year is proof that we are unable to self-regulate. Although most of us do not drink to the point of impairment and then drive, the imposition this law will place on us is a small price to pay to keep us all safer.
Marc Knapp, Annapolis
My brother is lying in intensive care as I write this, fighting for his life, the victim of another driver's impaired choice to drive someone else's car on a Saturday night while drunk. If that car had technology to prevent it's operation by this individual, my brother would be going through life in mundane bliss, not this horror that he's living and the long road to a crippled recovery. I absolutely support this legislation, "big brother" government be damned.
Lawrence Wood, West Point, Virginia
Only a small percentage of the population is involved in drunk driving and most of these serious actions are caused by repeat offenders. A better law would be to require the devices to be installed at the cost of the drunk driver or the owner of the car they drive. It is not fair to punish the entire population for the frailties of a small percentage. It is also necessary for the legal system to really go after these people. Another problem is a lot of these people are driving illegally and without insurance. In those cases, extended jail time should be mandatory even for the first offense for they would be driving illegally. They also should be labeled alcoholic and all drivers license it should be forfeited.
Will Hunt, Lancaster
Next week we’ll examine a new topic—Recent Police Reform’s Negative Impact on Policing & Crime—so put your thinking cap on now and get ready!
