correct such widespread contamination is extremely limited both technically and 

 economically" ( Huggett and Bender, in press) and that "Kepone is an example of but 

 one of thousands of potentially toxic new substances being manufactured every 

 year" (Nichols ei al.. 1979). 



Ultimately, recommendations for dealing with Kepone rest with the U.S. Envi- 

 ronmental Protection Agency, working in coordination with Virginia and Mary- 

 land. This is a massive burden to have resulted from inadequacy in operation, moni- 

 toring, and regulation. 



RECOGNITION OF THE CHESAPEAKE BAY AS A SYSTEM 



With increasing emphasis, the Chesapeake Bay and its tidal tributaries are being 

 regarded, studied, and managed as a single entity with physical, chemical, and bio- 

 logical continuity. In an estuarine system of this size, diversity, political subdivision, 

 and complexity, the approach has been achieved slowly and despite parochial reluc- 

 tance. The earliest recognition of the Bay's unity came to those navigators who used 

 the great single transportation network it provided. Subsequently, the scientific 

 community studied the physical system, the migratory species of invertebrates, fish, 

 and birds, the chemical continuity, and other aspects that required consideration of 

 its totality (Chesapeake Research Consortium, 1976; Cronin, L., et a I., 1971 ; Cronin, 

 W., 1971; Huggett et al., 1977; Kuoetal., 1975; Lynch etal., 1977; McErlean et al., 

 1972; Schubel. 1972). There is now broad but incomplete acceptance that "an 

 ecosystem must be ordered and husbanded within its own terms"( Hedgepeth, 1972), 

 and that the total Chesapeake is indeed such an ecosystem. 



Approach to the entity has been demonstrated in several areas in the last decade. A 

 series of conferences, supported by the states, citizens' groups, professional societies, 

 federal agencies, and several coalitions of state and federal agencies all focused on 

 the total Chesapeake Bay system (American Water Resources Association, 1976; 

 Bergoffen. 197 1 ; Chesapeake Research Consortium, 1977; National Aeronautic and 

 Space Administration, 1972; National Aeronautic and Space Administration. 1978; 

 State of Maryland. 1968; Washington Academy of Sciences, 1972). The reports from 

 these contain valuable overviews and integrated summaries. 



Research analysis and planning have become more comprehensive. The Chesa- 

 peake Research Consortium, Corps of Engineers, and Environmental Protection 

 Agency have developed broad program statements and implemented them ( Beers et 

 al., 1971 ; Office of Research and Development. 1980; Prentiss, 1972). The design of 

 research for some of the species considers the full estuary (State of Maryland and 

 Commonwealth of Virginia, 1980). Analysis of important issues and of the 

 application of research in their resolution has employed the complete Bay region as 

 the target (Douglas. 1979). Total system models have been attempted for nutrients 

 (Hydroscience, Inc.. 1975; Jaworski, 1981; Kuo et al., 1975; Laniak, 1979) and one 

 conceptual ecological model for Chesapeake Bay has been prepared (Green, 1978). 

 The largest estuarine hydraulic model, a fixed-bed geometrically distorted model at 

 1:1000 horizontal scale and 1:100 vertical scale, has been constructed, verified, and 

 employed in an initial series of studies ( McKay, 1976). The model occupies about 9 

 acres on Kent Island. Numerical analogues for hydrographic behavior and 

 containment dispersion in one-, two-, and three-dimensional models exist for 

 various portions of the Bay and for the system (Ulanowicz. 1976). Further 

 development and application of two- and three-dimensional models are 

 incorporated in the Chesapeake Bay Program. Models are essential for theoretical 

 and practical purposes, and these values are being employed and will be enhanced. 



Data systems abound. Twelve institutional systems have been identified ( Kohlen- 

 stein. 1972). and a large number of files exist for specific purposes. Quality control 

 varies as well as purpose and scope, and no unifying solution has yet been effected. 

 The most optimistic possibility for unification appears to be in a Primary Chesa- 



35 



