Bay, we've chosen to illustrate where the people live in Chesa¬ 
peake Bay by showing the locations of the principal point sources 
which occur around the Bay (Figure 3). They occur as one would 
expect, in the vicinity of Baltimore, in the vicinity of Washing¬ 
ton, in the vicinity of Richmond, and in the vicinity of Norfolk. 
The population of 12.7 million people who live in the Chesa¬ 
peake drainage basin are concentrated in three or four major 
metropolitan areas. This suggests that if one is interested in 
controlling pollution from point sources, one has a reasonable 
ability to identify and control those point sources in the main 
because they represent a few relatively small areas. 
That's not to say the smaller sewage treatment plants on the 
Eastern Shore at other locations on the Bay, are not important in 
their local areas, but we can capture 70 percent of all point 
sources by controlling four major metropolitan areas in the 
Chesapeake. 
It's projected that the 12.7 million population in 1980 will 
reach 14.6 million population in the year 2000. It's also 
projected that the population distribution will not be uniform 
across this area. In fact, most of the population increase will 
occur in the vicinity of the York River, which has no sewage 
treatment plants, relatively low population at the present time, 
and which is expected to grow 43 percent by the year 2000. 
The Rappahannock River Peninsula and its drainage basin is 
expected to grow 40 percent in the next 15 years, and the Patuxent 
River Basin is expected to grow 27 percent in the next 15 years. 
Land uses are illustrated in the pie diagrams (Figure 4). In 
1950, approximately half of the total drainage basin of the 
Chesapeake was in forest and hasn't changed dramatically in the 30 
years from 1950 to 1980. 
However, the amount of urban area has increased from 5 to 14 
percent in 30 years in the drainage basin, mostly at the expense of 
pasture land. Intensive urbanization, localized in specific areas, 
may be susceptible to controls and regulations because it is 
focused in relatively definable geographies. 
When John Smith sailed into the Mouth of the Chesapeake his 
logs indicate that the area, as one would expect, was essentially 
fully forested. It was forested with a full-growth climax forest. 
His crews described a layer of waist deep humus on the forest floor 
that overlaid the mineral soils. Half of it had been destroyed by 
1850 in the watershed of the Chesapeake. Destruction of this 
forest and its conversion to agricultural lands principally 
resulted in a dramatic increase in the rate of sedimentation in the 
Chesapeake (Table 1). 
22 
