this is some DEE DEE DEE reporting

In today's online wp, is an article concerning how wildlife taints our waters, and what can we do to combat "wildlife waste"? No, this is not a joke! Read it here:

Wildlife Waste Is Major Water Polluter, Studies Say
from the washington post, Sept. 29, 2006

Does a bear leave its waste in the woods?

Of course. So do geese, deer, muskrats, raccoons and other wild animals. And now, such states as Virginia and Maryland have determined that this plays a significant role in water pollution.

Scientists have run high-tech tests on harmful bacteria in local rivers and streams and found that many of the germs -- and in the Potomac and Anacostia rivers, a majority of them-- come from wildlife dung. The strange proposition that nature is apparently polluting itself has created a serious conundrum for government officials charged with cleaning up the rivers.

Part of the problem lies with the unnaturally high populations of deer, geese and raccoons living in modern suburbs and depositing their waste there. But officials say it would be nearly impossible, and wildly unpopular, to kill or relocate enough animals to make a dent in even that segment of the pollution.

That leaves scientists and environmentalists struggling with a more fundamental question: How clean should we expect nature to be? In certain cases, they say, the water standards themselves might be flawed, if they appear to forbid something as natural as wild animals leaving their dung in the woods.

"You need to go back and say, 'Maybe the standards aren't exactly right' if wildlife are causing the problem," said Thomas Henry, an Environmental Protection Agency official who works on water pollution in the mid-Atlantic.....

What environmentalist or conservationist has proposed cleaning up our nation's waterways to "cleaner than found in nature" standards? I do not believe anyone is trying to turn the Potomac River into a potable water source -- the Potomac is both tidal and brackish in the areas around D.C. so, even centuries ago, the only possibly way humans might drink from it was at its source: a spring in West VA about 300 miles upstream.

What we are trying to do is preserve the river's natural resources and restore both it and the Anacostia to their pre-"F-ed up-by-man" state. Are we really trying to point the finger at ducks and geese?

Pardon my non-French but NO SHIT Sherlock the WP Reporter, ducks and geese poop in the river. Where would you have them go, in the Smithsonian Natural History Museum where all the other tourists go? But I'll bet that, if the ducks and geese could have their way, they'd find a nice quiet out of the way river to poop in rather than in the crowded Potomac. However, I don't believe that the "wildlife" in and around the District have much choice in the matter.

If the percentage of waterfowl waste in the water around DC is higher now than it was in pre-"F-ed up-by-man" times, it is because they are more densely crowded into smaller and smaller areas than ever in history. They are certainly not choosing to be more densely crowded, they are forced by our actions. I'm just a pandologist but believe me, wildlife has always crapped in the river, and nature got by just fine prior to man coming in and upsetting the balance. Nature has an interesting way of, oh idunnowhatyoucallit, RECYCLING?, and returning organic matter to the earth to decompose. If the river is unhealthy now, it's not because the ducks and geese threw a wrench into the works, WE DID. ANd we don't need a numerical standard to tell us in percentages or so many "parts per millions" whether or not the river is sick. When the cleanest parts of the river are producing boy bass that lay eggs, I think that could be a clue that something is amiss. Balance is the key here, not arbitrary man-made standards.

If water quality standards are wrong, so be it. Fix it and lets move on. But there is NO WAY that duck poop is the cause. Puh-leeze.

Is this writer/"reporter" on crack? At least then there would be an excuse.