Historical Perspective

The Anacostia watershed remains a largely degraded urban ecosystem located in suburban Maryland and the District of Columbia. Within its 176 square mile drainage, Figure 1, there are nearly 805,000 inhabitants (1990 census), making it one of the most densely populated watersheds in the Chesapeake Bay basin. By the year 2010 that population is expected to increase by another 35,000 inhabitants (Warner et al., 1997).

During the 17th century the watershed was vastly different. It was a thriving center of Indian culture set amidst the Piedmont and Coastal Plain provinces. It contained healthy populations of sturgeon, american and hickory shad, white and yellow perch, redbreast sunfish, pickeral, catfish and herring, and provided the native Indians with an abundant food supply. Lush forests and abundant wildlife complemented clean waters that flowed into the Potomac River and ultimately emptied into the Chesapeake Bay.

In 1608, English Captain John Smith first surveyed the river, opening the watershed to European settlement and initiating changes in land use that have dramatically altered the watershed. Characterized by over 300 years of successive waves of cultivation of tobacco and cotton, small grains, corn and other row crops; dairying and livestock production; and urbanization; these changes have left little that resembles this once highly productive ecosystem.

The loss of important forest and wetland habitats, alteration of natural drainage patterns and streamflow, increases in erosion, sedimentation and nonpoint source pollution, and discharges of combined sewer overflow and industrial waste have all contributed to the decline of the ecological health of the watershed. Although the once pristine watershed reflects a system that has suffered from years of environmental neglect and urbanization, major restoration efforts since 1987 are beginning to improve conditions.

Land Use

Current land use in the Anacostia watershed reflects the general pattern of other metropolitan areas. The densest development is generally concentrated near the urban center (i.e., inside the Capital Beltway).

As of 1990, nearly 70 percent of the Anacostia watershed has been developed. Residential development (single family houses, townhouses and apartments) is the single largest land use, comprising 43 percent of the watershed (Figure 2). Impervious surfaces associated with development, such as parking lots, roads, and roof tops, cover approximately 23 percent of the watershed (Warner et al., 1997). Runoff from these areas carries a variety of pollutants to streams and can seriously degrade aquatic habitat. Streams typically become degraded when impervious surfaces cover more than 10 percent of a watershed, unless mitigated by effective stormwater management controls. As Figure 3 shows, imperviousness in individual subwatersheds ranges from a low of 11 percent in Beaverdam Creek to 48 percent for the tidal Northwest Bank portion in the District of Columbia.

Figure 2. Anacostia Watershed Existing Land Use (modified from Warner, 1996).

Within the greater Washington metropolitan area, the Anacostia River has often been called "the other river" or "the forgotten river" (ICPRB, 1988). Prior to 1987, much of the environmental concern and focus was on the larger ailing Potomac River. However, a concerted and focused effort to restore and protect the Anacostia watershed began over a decade ago. During that time, local, state, regional and Federal government agencies, as well as environmental organizations, businesses and dedicated citizens have contributed significant resources toward its restoration and protection. Formal cooperation between government agencies came with the signing of the 1987 Anacostia Watershed Restoration Agreement and the establishment of the Anacostia Watershed Restoration Committee (AWRC) to oversee the restoration. Members of the AWRC include the District of Columbia, Montgomery and Prince George's counties in Maryland, the state of Maryland, and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. In addition to the members, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments and the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin provide both technical and administrative staff support to the AWRC and its restoration efforts (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Anacostia Watershed Restoration Committee, 1997 Members: Montgomery County Prince George's County District of Columbia   State of Maryland U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Federal Liaison)         Trash Workgroup   Anacostia Watershed Citizens Advisory Committee Three representatives, each from the following: Montgomery County Prince George's County District of Columbia       Toxics Workgroup         Other: Anacostia Special Study   Note: The Toxics Workgroup is an ad hoc group.

Over the last 10 years, actions taken by the AWRC and affiliated organizations have resulted in substantial restoration progress. Shortly after it was created, the AWRC established a framework to guide long-term restoration efforts. The vision for a comprehensive, ecologically based restoration effort was laid out in a document: A Commitment to Restore Our Home River: A Six-Point Action Plan to Restore the Anacostia River (COG, 1991). To achieve those goals, the AWRC has identified some 580 restoration projects designed to correct existing environmental problems and enhance overall ecosystem quality. Of these, approximately 29 percent have either been completed or are in progress.

The successes have required the identification of problems, associated solutions, coordination of programs, and the mobilization of critical government, political and financial resources. One of the key features in the success of the Anacostia program has been both in the development of common watershed restoration goals and in the identification and establishment of partnerships. Currently, the restoration claims supporting partnerships from over sixty government agencies and environmental organizations. Most recently, another important partnership was established in 1996 with the creation of the AWRC's Anacostia Watershed Citizens Advisory Committee (AWCAC). The AWCAC has brought formal recognition of the importance and need for citizen input and involvement in the restoration. Through this new committee, the AWRC has strengthened its commitment to the restoration and to the citizens of the watershed.

Into the early 1990s, the driving force behind the restoration effort was primarily local and state governments, as well as regional organizations. As the restoration has broadened, active participation by the Federal landowners has increased and become a priority objective. Collectively, Federal agencies (including the National Park Service, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Defense) own and operate facilities that make up 15 percent of the total land area of the watershed.

The importance of the restoration has been recognized by both Congress and the White House via its selection in 1994 as a National Ecosystem Management Model by a White House Interagency Task Force. Unfortunately, the Anacostia has also been cited nationally as exemplifying urban watershed problems. These problems are typified by: conversion of natural drainage networks into man-made channels; increased runoff and urban pollutants from its impervious surfaces; channel erosion and associated loss of aquatic habitat from changes in land use; sediments laden with toxins and other pollutants from motor vehicles, electrical transformers, past applications of persistent pesticides, poorly timed applications of fertilizers, combined sewer overflows, atmospheric deposition and pet waste; and thousands of tons of trash and debris.

The current condition of the Anacostia watershed reflects over 300 years of environmental degradation. It will require decades of change and commitment to restore conditions to support a far greater ecological balance. It is gratifying that, after 10 years, signs of positive environmental change are beginning to emerge. The submerged aquatic vegetation that was once absent from the river is beginning to reappear, signaling some improvement in water clarity, as the volume and concentrations of pollutants from urban runoff have been reduced.

Figure 5. Status of Restoration Projects as of 1997 (COG, 1998).

The incidence of environmental abuse and neglect that was commonly observed in the past, is much less prevalent today. In part this is due to tougher environmental laws and regulations coupled with the commitment being made by agencies and increasing numbers of groups and individuals to protect and restore the watershed.

To date, approximately $20 million (1997 dollars) have been spent on implementing roughly 29 percent of the identified restoration projects (Figure 5), with additional millions of dollars spent on planning, design, land acquisition and maintenance. An additional $54 million have been spent on engineering controls designed to reduce the impacts of combined sewer overflows on the tidal river and of leaking, aging sewer lines on tributary streams. The past 10 years of the restoration effort have included numerous milestone events (Table 2).