Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1957-07-08
|RiverbendDa
Foes Reminded
OF Key Factors
Small Upstream
Projects Costly,
Col. Sumner Says
By JOHN W. STEPP

River Bend Dam opponents
yesterday were reminded that
people farther upstream don't
want their lands inundated
any more than do those dwell
ers Of the River Bend area.
The observation was made
by Col. George B. Sumner.
Washington District Engineer
of the Army Engineer Corps. in
response to recent urgings that
the River Bend project be
shelved forever in favor of a
series of small dams on the
Potomac.
The comment came in an in
terview broadcast yesterday
morning over Radio Station
WWDC. Col. Sumner is in
charge Of a comprehensive sur
vey Of the watershed to deter
mine-among many other
things-the best measures that
should be taken to assure the
Washington Metropolitan Area
OF adequate water supply for
the foreseeable future.
Two Factors Noted
The proposals for small up
stream dams were aired at pub
lie hearings conducted by the
engineers last month.
They came from three main
sources: Property owners whose
lands would be drowned by the
River Bend impeachment, in
terests opposed to inundating a
possible IS miles of historic
Gao canal and wildlife con-
servation spokesman who pre-
fer no change in the Potomac's
present natural surroundings
between Washington and Har-
pers Ferry, w. Va.
Col. Sumner conceded that
small dams on the rivers head
waters could do the job of
supplying Washington with
sufficient water. But. he noted,
two factors must be kept upper
most. The first, he said. is
that the cost-per-unit of water
storage rapidly increases as the
size Of the damned reservoir
decreases.
And, turning to the human
part Of the problem, the engi-
neer added land flooded up
stream is just as dear to its
inhabitants as land down.
stream" Col. Sumner then
summed the objective Of the
current survey this way:
proper river development
planning must take all factors
into consideration so that the
plan recommended is econom-
ical and is beneficial to the
greatest number of people
throughout the watershed.
He emphasized that although
a dam at River Bend-about 3
miles above Great Falls-vas
recommended by the Engineer
District in 1916, his Office now
is taking a fresh, unfettered
look" at all the water resource
problems of the Potomac and
its tributaries.
Engineers Not Committed
His implication was that the
engineers are by no means
committed to recommending
once again a high level dam
at that point. He admitted.
however, that from an en-
gineering standpoint, River
Bend is a very attractive dam
SITE"
Among its advantages. Col.
Sumner said, is the fact that it
is the only site that can regu-
late flood flows originating be-
tween the Potomac's head
waters and Washington And
the flood potential here is a
problem ranking close to the
threat of inadequate river flows
that are bound to recur
whether years from now OF to-
morrow.
In Stressing the engineers
non commitment to River
Bend, Col. Sumner said he
thinsk IAN undue amount of
time" was spent discussing that
location during the recent
hearings. He also observed
with obvious resentment that
recently formed organiza-
ton ostensibly interested in a
comprehensive plan seemed
throughout the hearings to
concentrate on the objective of
killing River Bend Dam and
removing it from any further
consideration in the survey"
His apparent reference was
to the so-called Co-ordinating
Committee on the Potomac
River on which Frederick Gut
helm. an affected property
owner. and Waverly Taylor, an
affected real estate dealer. are
active.