Letters to the Editor

May 14, 2005

Insight of watermen critical for the bay

Reading Michael Hill's article "An environmental resurrection" (May 8), I was delighted by Wayne Bell's regard for the contributions of amateurs to scientific knowledge.

More than 50 years ago, Aldo Leopold published similar appreciation for the value of amateur research and its significance to science and ecological stability.

In our current situation, watermen should be acknowledged as amateur ichthyologists and ecologists who "actually contribute more to knowledge than scientists."

Casual observers may now be more important to the advancement of science and the stability of the Chesapeake Bay, particularly since our current science is either insufficient or inaccurate.

Unfortunately for science and conservation, watermen have no incentive to talk.

But considering the public costs thus far of attempts to save the bay and the lackluster results, we might consider employing fewer scientists and more amateurs.

Marguerite Whilden
Edgewater

The writer is the founder of the Terrapin Institute.