P. Boehm: The only trend data that I've seen was presented by Gordon 
Wallace. That's sort of a long-term trend. It's not really addressing a time frame that we 
want to look at in years, say one, two, three, or five years. 
It's even hard answering the magnitude questions; there's just so little data. 
The trend question has to be answered by well-designed, statistically valid studies. And as 
somebody mentioned before, most of the area's information has come from engineering- 
related studies, end-of-pipe studies, and studies that really haven't addressed longer-term 
monitoring in a spatial sense. So we can't really answer that question on the time frame 
we're looking at. Things are getting worse when we look at—I don't know what the 
duration of Gordon's was—the data at the bottom of your core? 
G. Wallace: Supposedly about 1900. 
P. Boehm: Between 1900 and now things have gotten worse. That's the type 
of resolution I would really like to know. 
J. Thomas: Is the trend still going downhill or is it leveling off? In discussing 
Delaware Bay, Jon Sharp came down here several months ago and stated that the lower 
part of the Delaware River and the upper part of Delaware Bay were actually improving. 
The agencies in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware had gotten together and were 
starting to, in fact, get on top of the question and to come out on the upper side, to 
bottom out. So some estuaries around the country have bottomed out and are coming up. 
I gather in this case your feeling is that since 1900 it's gotten worse, but 
maybe now you're either unsure or you don't know if it's bottomed out. Is that a fair 
statement? 
P. Boehm: We have absolutely no idea. Gordon's data on the effluent, if 
you're talking about concentrations of metals, is good temporal data, and some of those 
metals are up and down. If you're talking about sources, maybe Gordon can comment on 
this; some appear to be getting better or worse. But in terms of the health of the 
ecosystem, I don't think we have a clue. 
G. Wallace: I don't see any evidence in the effluent data. Some statements 
have been made, and perhaps with zinc you could argue that the concentrations have been 
going down. But even more recent data from 1984, which I've seen a few months of, 
shows no evidence of a trend in the effluent data versus time, and I've talked to our local 
statisticians about this. And I even have analytical questions about the quality of that 
data. 
So I certainly don't see any reason why things should be getting better based on 
the limited evidence we have and on the activity in the Boston area. I would doubt that 
we could see any improvement, as I said, in terms of metal loading in another five or ten 
years depending on when those plants go on line. 
119 
