The "Sutherland Report," officially known as "A Water Quality and Watershed Study of Loughberry Lake," was published in June 1988. The report is often cited by those who hope to see Saratoga Springs draw water from Saratoga Lake. It is justifiably used to that end, as Dr. Sutherland, and his two co-authors conclude that:

"Two situations are likely to occur if a high rate of urbanization continue in the watershed. First, it is likely that a spill of toxic or hazardous material will occur causing the immediate closure of the Lake for potable use. Second, the rate of urbanization might result in the load of plant nutrients, sediment, trace metals, fecal bacteria and pesticides to the watershed and the Lake.
Since both of the above scenarios are distinct possibilities, we believe the City of Saratoga Springs should review previous water supply studies and pursue one of more recommendation."

The report then names Saratoga Lake as one of several alternatives available to the city.

But, what you don't often hear is the exact language used in the report. Now, I'm no scientist, a fact that will soon be obvious, but even I can recognize the hesitant tone in the report. It's as if Sutherland is sure of his conclusions, but not sure of the methodology used to achieve them.

First and foremost of his concerns is the data used concerning water flowing into the lake. "Any estimate of safe yield is only as good as the data available. Long term would require 30, or more, years of record," he says. The Sutherland report is based on data collected over 13 months.

The report also points out that there is little or no data concerning the quality of water in the reservoir, and also, that the effect of development around Loughberry Lake is not known.

So, while, Dr. Sutherland is confident in saying that a spill of dangerous chemicals into the lake is likely to occur, and that an increase in the amount of paved ground could create more polluted runoff, the one thing that screams throughout the report is the need for more study.

Now, don't get me wrong here. I believe it would be foolish at this juncture for the city not to complete the application for their permit to draw water from the lake, and to accept that permit. I'm not saying we should take water from the lake now or ever, but, if further study reveals that Loughburry Lake is indeed in crisis, or if there is a real, unforeseen, disaster a generation from now, we're going to be awfully sorry if we don't have alternatives.

The wells in Geyser Crest and the County Water line are also both viable alternatives, but why, after all the money already spent on work to secure that permit, would we turn our backs on a lake water permit now?

Just as it was good engineering for the county to plan to leave "Ts" in the neighborhood of the city, in case we choose to connect to the system later, taking the permit would be little more than common sense.

Thanks to Kyle York for the background for today's post.

In the paper this week look for an update on the litigation between the city and the Saratoga Lake Association, which is headed to the New York Court of Appeals.