135 



The hydraulic model of Chesapeake Bay will provide the necessary steps to 

 the scientific and engineering problem solutions so urgently required now. 



Most of the problems confronting the Chesapeake Bay are not and cannot be 

 subject to rigorous mathematical analysis. The hydraulic model is an absolute 

 necessity for continuing the economic, scientific and engineering study for the 

 preservation of the Bay. 



Some of the important uses of the model ai'e : 



First. Determination of the salinity distribution in the Bay system, and how 

 it is affected by both natural events and the works of man. 



Second. Determination of the mechanics of estuary flushing, the characteristics 

 of waste dispersion, and the potential waste assimilation capacity of the Bay. 



Third. Location and evaluation of erosion and sedimentation problems. 



Fourth. By analogy, the effects of certain processes, both of nature and of 

 man, on some biological characteristics of the Bay. 



Fifth. Determination of least hazardous site location for underwater outfalls, 

 thermal power station, and so forth. 



At the request of the House Appropriations Committee a reanalysis of the 

 study was completed during fiscal year 1969. The revised cost estimate for the 

 Chesapeake Bay resource study is approximately $15 million. 



A conservative estimate of the combined yearly value of both the commiercial 

 and the sport fishery of Chesapeake Bay is $100 million. If we were to capitalize 

 the fishing industry at $100 million a year at 4%-percent interest for 50 years, 

 we would arrive at the astronomical sum of $18.6 billion. The total cost of the 

 proposed Chesapeake Bay resource study is less than one-tenth of 1 percent of 

 $18.6 billion. 



It must be remembered that the fishery resource of Chesapeake Bay represents 

 only a small portion of the total value of the Bay. 



Process, procedure, and habit have been developed and applied for so long 

 without thought to actual or potential impact on our environment, that many 

 areas have already been reduced to an intolerable pollutional morass. This is 

 doubly tragic as the technology to study and abate has been readily available. 

 We cannot allow ourselves to be reduced to a State of self-pity, and possibly 

 self-destruction. We must use our technical and scientific resources. 



It is imperative that lead time on Chesapeake Bay be generated before we are 

 forced into agreement and action by catastrophe. We simply must assume the 

 responsibility to make this important study, develop rational management 

 schemes, establish a viable management mechanism, and bring to a halt the 

 steadily increasing deterioration of the Bay resource. 



It is impossible to overemphasize the fact that, as the quality of the environ- 

 ment deteriorates, so does the quality of life. We must stop fouling our nest, for 

 at the very least, it will soon become uninhabitable, and at the very most, non- 

 existent. 



Recognizing the problems, and lip service to them, is no longer enough. Action 

 is the only answer. 



Mr. Lennon. The gentleman from Virginia — since you were here 

 early this morning. 



Mr. Downing. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



I want to compliment the gentleman on his statement. I might say 

 the gentleman need not worry that he does not have specifics. You 

 have such weight. By that, I mean national influence. If you just said, 

 "I am for it" that is a considerable recommendation of the bill. 



Thank you, old friend. You made a good statement. 



Mr. Morton. Thank you, sir. 



Mr, Lennon. I agree with the statement. I am delighted to have 

 you here. 



Mr. Pelly? 



Mr. Pelly. I think our colleague on a number of occasions has been 

 late in coming to these committee hearings as I was tliis morning, 

 and will pardon me because he knows that often we have constituents 

 or other important matters which prevent us from being here on time. 

 I am glad I did get here. I have read your statement and I commend 

 you for it. 



