Evening star., 1963-09-18
Bio Dam at Seneca

Dry LuW UL SeHeCU
While the membership of
the Northeastern Resources
Development Association,
which I represent, stand for
full and complete develop
ment of natural resources,
which would include hydro
power facilities, now not in
cluded, at the main stem
dam at Seneca, I feel I must
take exception to your edi-
torial big Dam at Seneca.
The public outrage you
speak Of is by a highly vo-
cal and organized group, but
one which represents a dis
tinct minority. But despite
this outburst, reasonable
thinking people will favor
that plan which is necessary
to provide an adequate sup
ply of clean water now and
In the future.
AS to the recreational re-
sources which you mention as
being lost, I must question:
What resources? If you refer
to the footpaths along the
Gao Canal, 80 per cent Of
these will remain. This 80
per cent is the most utilized
of the 1876 miles now exist
ing.
You mention that many ex-
pertS are convinced that a
series of small impoundments
above Harpers Ferry would
suffice for a long time. I
must ask what experts2 At
the hearings before the
Board of Engineers on Sep
tember 5. I heard many So
called experts speak on this
matter. but without basis in
fact. However, the Wolman
Report. 1857, published by
the Interstate Commission on
the Potomac Basin, found
that the construction Of res
ervoirs above Harpers Ferry
as a substitute for a large
main stem reservoir would
worsen the problem of silt
control, a major problem of
the Potomac and one to be
corrected by a main stem
dam.
AS to pollution - while
wishful thinking might indi-
cate potential breakthroughs
in pollution control, fact die
tates that this is just not in
the cards. The day is far
off when sewage treatment
alone, by any method, Is suf-
ficient.
In fact, all plans Of basin
development. considered by
the District Engineer, are
based upon IS per cent to
80 per cent treatment Of all
sewage in the basin.
Someone should come up
with "other pollution control
alternatives" but no one
has. AS to water supply. to
date, the only recommended
ton has been distillation at
an annual cost of $27 mil
lion as compared to a $2.5
million annual cost on the
recommended project.
One Of the experts I pre-
sumo you were quoting was
a Mr.. Sign, who represented
the Glen Royal Citizens Com
mittee, and a local Rod and
Gun Club. He stated that
the Johnstown Flood was
caused by a dam. and in that
flood, 1000 people lost their
lives. which is the almost ex-
act number Of souls, he said,
who reside in the county
seat. located Just below the
proposed dam site. The i'm
plication was apparent. What
he didn't say was that the
State Of Pennsylvania built
the dam in 1853 and later
turned 1t over to a rod and
gun club, (conservationists,
/ presume) who raised the
dam some 30 feet, and were
repeatedly warned Of its dan
gerous condition. The rest is
history.
II the Nations Capital is
to have an adequate supply
Of clean water, something
will have TO be done. No bet
ter solution is available than
a main stem dam. This is
fact. We can no longer long
ingly look forward to some
day" when some other
method" will be feasible.
Edward w. Kiley
Co-ordinator, Northeastern
Resources Development As
ISOLATION.