In the different chapters of this report, various things stand out that
need to be started quickly, either to satisfy looming demands for water
development and water quality control, or to restore or protect scenic,
ecological, and recreational assets which, if not attended to quite
soon, are going to either disappear or suffer irreparable damage. A few
recommendations for action on certain of these immediate problems were
made in our _Interim Report_ of two years ago, together with
recommendation on one or two noncontroversial items clearly not in
conflict with any conceivable ultimate Basin aims. In abbreviated
essence, the main Interim recommendations, made with Interdepartmental
Task Force and Interstate Advisory Committee approval, were as follows:
(1) That a decision on the construction of Seneca dam and reservoir
on the Potomac main stem be indefinitely deferred, but that the
site be preserved as much as possible against further encroachment,
in case it is ever needed;
(2) That three relatively small reservoirs be built on tributary
creeks in the Paw Paw Bends area of the upper Basin, in addition to
the authorized Bloomington reservoir on the North Branch, to begin
providing a safe margin of water for metropolitan Washington and to
serve Basin recreational needs;
(3) That a permanent "green sheath" of protection for the Potomac
main stem, together with major recreational opportunity, be assured
by means of a new kind of composite park of varying width along
both shores from Washington, D.C., to Cumberland, Maryland;
(4) That the Cacapon River and the West Virginia portion of the
Shenandoah be given Wild River status by Congress to protect their
shores against excessive and inappropriate encroachment;
(5) That water quality programs and research be accelerated toward
certain minimum goals;
(6) That Soil Conservation Service and related Forest Service
programs for erosion control, water management and development, and
recreation benefits be accelerated;
(7) That the authorized boundaries of the George Washington
National Forest be extended to provide public access to and
protection of the two forks of the Shenandoah above their
confluence;
(8) That Mason Neck on the upper estuary be preserved; and
(9) That the George Washington Memorial Parkway be extended from
Mount Vernon to Yorktown as the beginning of a system of scenic
roads and parkways in and around the Basin.
One of the recommendations has had to be deferred, though the need
implicit in it remains acute--that the Cacapon and the West Virginia
Shenandoah be included in the Wild Rivers Bill then pending before
Congress. It had been thought that this Bill might be used to protect
the Basin's threatened main tributary rivers, beginning with these two
in West Virginia, but afterward doubt arose that the standards set up
for Wild Rivers--the primary point of reference being Western streams
flowing through sparsely peopled, often publicly owned country--would
make sense or be feasible in a settled region.
Mason Neck has been preserved by great effort on the part of
individuals, organizations, and different levels of government. More
remains to be done in the way of consolidation of what is there and its
adaptation to intended purposes, but the hardest part of the job is
accomplished; a critically endangered asset has been protected. Funds
have been voted by Congress for the acquisition of the Bloomington
reservoir site in accordance with the Interim recommendation. Water
quality improvement in the Basin is on the point of being significantly
accelerated toward high goals, as the new State standards are reviewed
and approved and start getting enforcement, though for specific trouble
spots and categories of pollution special Federal or other action is
going to be needed and is the subject of new recommendations
accompanying this final report.
The rest of the _Interim Report_ measures require Congressional action,
which none has yet received. In some cases this is because technically
detailed authorizing legislation has taken time to prepare, in others
because budgetary or policy realities have brought delay or
reconsideration, and in still others because of a feeling at higher
levels that certain recommendations could be better evaluated in terms
of a final report's whole set of proposals. In the present set of
recommendations they are repeated, for they represent genuine needs.
Some have been slightly altered in the light of evolving restrictive
reality, more recent knowledge, or flexibility, and the suggested or
implied Interim scheduling for some has been changed. It is no longer
envisioned, for instance, that the parkway extension below Mount Vernon
will be authorized and constructed quickly.
The present recommendations, though much wider in overall scope than our
earlier ones, represent only a first step in planning for the Basin, for
reasons presented in full in this report. They are attuned to present
economic and technological possibilities, as they must be. We believe
that if they get full and calm appraisal they will prove to be
acceptable politically, for all of them that call for major projects
represent solutions for acute and imminent problems for which other
satisfactory solutions do not presently exist, and to the greatest
possible degree they have been made flexible to accommodate possible
future change in aims or techniques.
In most cases, the reasons for specific recommendations have already
been given in the body of this report. However, the primary public
interest that focuses on the matter of major storage reservoirs may make
it worthwhile at this point to review and enlarge upon the facts. Some
reservoirs are going to have to be built if the Basin is to cope
satisfactorily with water supply, water quality, and recreational
demands. At the time of the _Interim Report_, we recognized that the
three reservoirs in the Paw Paw Bends area, together with Bloomington,
were very possibly not going to be enough to meet the need, but we made
a recommendation for their authorization because it was clear that they
would take the edge off the immediately looming water problem at
Washington, would mesh well with any additional future storage in the
Basin, and would have no major disruptive scenic effects but instead
would provide a great deal of high-quality flat-water recreation in an
area where there was significant demand for it.
These considerations still apply. However, the more complete picture of
Basin water problems that has emerged in our studies since the _Interim
Report_ shows that at least two more reservoirs are very possibly going
to be needed, and that the most useful scheduling of initial projects
will combine an answer for upstream problems with the satisfaction of
near-future needs at metropolitan Washington.
Besides the stretch of concentrated industry and population along the
North Branch, where Bloomington Reservoir is going to be needed as soon
as possible, three upper-Basin areas with major storage sites available
near at hand are faced with large water shortages in the near or middle
future, and have streams that would benefit greatly from flow
augmentation. In the order of the critical importance of their problems,
they are Frederick, Maryland, on the Monocacy; Chambersburg,
Pennsylvania, on the Conococheague Creek; and the Staunton-Waynesboro
area on the upper tributaries of the Shenandoah's South Fork, in
Virginia.
Chambersburg lies in an area where opposition to any major reservoirs
has been heavy. An interim solution to the local problem, though
possibly not satisfactory in the long run, can be found in a system of
small headwater reservoirs. The major Chambersburg reservoir site has
received full consideration as an element in a water-storage package to
begin dealing with Basin demands. But its immediate advantages are not
so unique as to justify going against the area's apparent wishes, and it
has not been included as a recommendation.
The reservoirs at Verona near Staunton and at Sixes Bridge on the
Monocacy, fortunately, can be adequately coordinated with Bloomington
and the three Paw Paw impoundments to provide roughly a twenty-year
margin of safety in water supply at Washington, besides coping with
foreseeable shortages in their immediate neighborhoods, furnishing
desired flat-water recreation, and contributing greatly to water quality
and recreation benefits downstream. They are also locally and State
supported. For these reasons, they have been chosen to fill out the
recommended system of major reservoirs to meet near-future Basin
demands.
The construction schedule recommended is based on the rate at which
upstream and metropolitan demands are expected to develop in relation to
each other. And, in accordance with flexible principles of planning,
there is provision that if more desirable alternative sources of water
or any changes in expected aims or demands evolve, the schedule or the
plan itself may be altered. Thus, if this first-stage plan is adopted,
the reservoirs to which the region will be committed at any given time
will be only those for which there is actual immediate need, but
coordination will not have been lost. This same kind of flexibility is
built into the recommendations relating to flow augmentation for quality
control.
Other proposals for major action are self-explanatory or are analyzed in
detail in separate sub-task force material. Among these latter is the
Potomac National River, as the park proposal is now designated, which
represents the most hopeful approach to defending the main stem Potomac
against destructive encroachment and enhancing its potential for
recreation.
Some of the recommendations presented are relatively small in scope but
nonetheless essential to cleaning up, preservation, or other desirable
ends. Others aim not toward immediate action but toward research or
legislation to clear the way for needed action--examples are those
regarding acid mine drainage and the possible need for a new Federal
category of "pastoral" or "scenic" rivers in populated regions. And
still others are only suggestions that non-Federal jurisdictions act in
regard to specific problems that fall within the realm of their
responsibility.
[Illustration]
If this body of recommendations is significantly implemented as an
initial program, it can lead to a good solid beginning on the things
that need to be done in the Potomac Basin. Without treading heavily on
the freedom of choice of future populations, it can satisfy the water
demands of the Basin during a long enough span of years to give
scientists time to examine the full range of evolving alternatives for
water management, and planners freedom to choose perhaps better ways of
meeting future demands than are now available.
The program can clean up the main streams of the Basin and assure their
healthy and copious flow even in time of drought, keep their banks
beautiful, and make them more available than they presently are for the
people's enjoyment. Even in the major trouble spots of the present
time--stretches like the lower North Branch and the metropolitan
estuary--dramatic improvement in the appearance of the water and its
usefulness for boating and fishing and such things will be possible if
the recommendations are followed out to where they lead, though full
restoration in such spots, particularly in the estuary, is going to
require an expansion of present knowledge and a long-continuing effort
on the part of all agencies and jurisdictions.
The program will not assure general protection of the Basin's landscape,
for only the Basin's people, generation on generation of them, can
assure that. But it can preserve some of the major treasures in that
landscape and mitigate some of the worst threats to it. And by fostering
projects to illustrate how a respect for the landscape can be put to
work, and bringing people into closer contact with the old realities of
the Basin's natural world, it can stimulate understanding and feeling
that will lead to wider restoration and protection, possibly that
general protection that only the people can assure.
If the spirit of these recommendations prevails, we believe that they
can lead reasonably soon to a Potomac Basin fit to serve as a model for
the nation. And if they are followed by further stages of continuing,
flexible, coordinated planning that will apply the best technology to
new problems as they arise, keep Basin aims in mind, maintain a high
sense of values, and leave open all possible options for the people who
come after, the Basin will remain a model. And that has been the aiming
point of our study and our planning.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]