Eliza Smith Steinmeier, the Baltimore Harbor Waterkeeper , said she and other watershed watchdogs were worried that the federal strategy unveiled last month retreats from the position staked out earlier by the Environmental Protection Agency that it intended to expand and toughen its oversight of chicken farms and developed land to reduce polluted runoff - the bay's biggest water-quality woe.  The strategy now says EPA plans to draft new rules, but would only impose them if states fail to take adequate steps on their own to control farm and storm-water pollution.

"If the states were doing such a good job already," asked Gerald Winegrad, a former state senator from Annapolis, "what are we doing here?" Noting that the states and federal government failed to meet cleanup goals set in 1987 and have acknowledged they're not going to meet them by next year's self-imposed deadline, either, he added, "It's really essential we grab the bull by the horns and change the status quo.  It isn't working."

Winegrad spearheaded a public appeal last year by 20 bay scientists and former policy makers to substitute more government regulation and enforcement for the largely voluntary collaborative bay cleanup approach that has been the rule between states and federal government the past 26 years.  Last night, speaking on behalf of the group, he said the federal strategy was a step in the right direction, but lacked detail and strong enough measures.

Terry Cummings of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation likewise complained that the plan lacked specifics on the time frames by which cleanup steps must be taken and was largely silent on pledges of additional federal funding to help.  Of greatest concern, though, was the strategy's silence on what the federal government would do if states fail to act or achieve promised restoration goals.  The Annapolis-based environmental group has sued the federal government for not taking a stronger role in the cleanup effort to date.

J. Charles Fox, the EPA's senior bay advisor, acknowledged the concerns and said federal laws now limit his and other federal agencies' reach -- in dealing, for instance, with development patterns that contribute to the bay's decline.  He said federal officials hope to compel the states to take the needed steps through a baywide pollution "diet'' the EPA is drawing up now, which would impose strict limits on new and existing discharges of pollutants to improve the bay's many degraded rivers and streams.

EPA also intends to lay out by the end of this month, Fox said, what consequences states could face if they fail to achieve their cleanup goals.   He didn't elaborate, but has said before that penalties could include loss of federal funds or strict limits on new growth.

The sentiments are likely to be different at the next public forum on the federal bay strategy tonight in Salisbury, the de facto capital of the Eastern Shore's poultry industry.   Farmers have been just as vehement against more government regulation - particularly from the federal government - as environmental activists have been in calling for it.  For a list of forum dates and locations, go here.

Federal officials have said they intend to take public comments into account before finalizing their strategy next May.  Members of the public can submit comments through Jan. 9.  To learn more, go here.