LETTERS: EPA EFFORTS WORTHWHILE0

To the editor:

This letter is in response to Ray Umbdenstock's second letter in reference to Environmental Protection Agency spending. Before addressing the topic at hand, I would like to say that I have not, as of yet, been witness to such announcements or promises as were mentioned by Mr. Umbdenstock in reference to the EPA and its programs. Perhaps I am not reading the correct publication or listening to the right programs, but I would certainly be open to any sources that Mr. Umbdenstock might be able to offer in reference to his opinions.

The EPA handles a wide variety of topics, all of which relate to the health of the environment in some manner. The current auto emissions policy was initiated to aid in the possible decrease of smog and air pollution. Inevitably, this is not the only contributor to such pollution of our atmosphere. However, it is one of the more simple answers to a problem that cannot be solved overnight, and it is a starting point upon which the government can begin to elicit certain regulations necessary to aid in the elimination of air pollutants.

Being a biologist, I do admit that in the past the EPA, along with several other government and private agencies, has made some mistakes. One such mistake or misunderstanding involved the definition of exactly what a wetland is. However, recently a definition has been agreed upon that does not cover "puddles of water." These agencies have worked very hard to inform the public as to the value of wetlands. Not only are wetlands a productive, if not more, than the world's rain forests, but they are also the kidneys of the land we live on. They filter out toxins that would otherwise be found in our groundwater supply and, therefore, cost us, the taxpayers, more money to remove. They are premiere fish and wildlife habitat and certainly do not render any person's land "worthless."

I believe that most human will agree that we are the reason our planet is polluted, and I certainly hope that we can continue to work toward the goal of solving our pollution problems. In reference to that goal and the previous letters written to this newspaper: If we cannot put our trust (and, yes, our money) in the EPA to fix these problems, who, then, should we trust? Results are never absolute, nor are they easy to come by, and I personally believe that the EPA's use of my tax money is appropriate and worthwhile.

T. ADDINGTON

Cape Girardeau