Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A Research Paper
of Cornell University
by
Veronica O. Davis
January 2004
© 2004 Veronica O. Davis
ABSTRACT
Two rivers are prominent in Washington, DC. Once, both were pristine,
but with the city’s growth, they became badly polluted. The Potomac River
Events suggest that racial inequality and class differences shaped many of the
decisions and policies that led to the current environmental inequality. One of
the major influences has been uneven federal funding and efforts for
restoration.
I begin with a brief history of funding efforts for each river. I then show
blacks and whites. By 1960, the areas around the Anacostia River had been
turned into predominately communities of color, while the areas around the
Information Systems (GIS) analysis supports these findings with maps that
show a clustering of non-whites and poor around the Anacostia River for 1970
and 1980.
Lastly, a correlation analysis shows that there was a strong negative
1950 and 1960, with Anacostia neighborhoods housing poor people of color.
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
from the suburbs, she traveled through the inner city projects of Newark to run
children playing in abandoned lots, she learned early that not everyone had
the same opportunities in life. It was then that her passion to make a positive
Only five days after graduating from high school, Veronica entered the
University of Maryland, College Park. During her tenure, she was recognized
for her leadership within the A. James Clark School of Engineering and
was initiated into Chi Epsilon, the National Civil Engineering Honor Society, as
Society.
Planning, she has focused on land use planning and economic development.
While in graduate school, she held several regional leadership positions within
iii
DEDICATION
I dedicate this research paper to Selena Smalls a dear friend who was a victim
of a senseless act of violence. God called her home on October 11, 2002. I
will fight for justice so her death will not be in vain.
“When one commits oneself to the struggle, it must be for a lifetime” – Angela Davis
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Above all, I have to give praise and honor to God who has given me the
strength, endurance, and wisdom needed to write this paper. Next, I would
like to thank my family who has always been my biggest supporters and my
through the writing of this paper. I also appreciate the time they spent to help
laid the foundation for the concepts in this paper. She asked me the questions
that expanded this from a paper in her class to a larger-scale research project.
obtaining data for the nation’s capital was difficult. I would like to thank the
v
• Jair Lynch, Jair Lynch Companies
and self-doubt. I would like thank my friends for listening to my babble and
providing positive reinforcement, particularly, Joe Banda, who would not let me
box in the first place (in reference to thinking outside of the box).
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH................................................................................................................ iii
DEDICATION ........................................................................................................................................iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................vii
LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................................... viii
LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................................ix
CHAPTER 1: THE BREATHTAKING POTOMAC RIVER AND BEGRIMED ANACOSTIA
RIVER ......................................................................................................................................................1
BREATHTAKING POTOMAC RIVER .........................................................................................................1
BEGRIMED ANACOSTIA RIVER ..............................................................................................................3
POTOMAC RIVER VERSUS THE ANACOSTIA RIVER .................................................................................4
CHAPTER 2: COMMUNITY, ENVIRONMENT, COLOR AND CLASS .......................................6
NATIONAL AND REGIONAL LEVEL EVIDENCE .......................................................................................7
HEALTH AFFECTS ................................................................................................................................10
CASE STUDIES .....................................................................................................................................11
CHAPTER 3: NEIGHBORHOOD FORMATION IN WASHINGTON, DC THROUGH
GENTRIFICATION, AND PUBLIC POLICY ..................................................................................15
GEORGETOWN AS AN EXAMPLE OF GENTRIFICATION IN NW DC .........................................................16
THE SW WATERFRONT EXAMPLE OF GENTRIFICATION ........................................................................18
ANACOSTIA: DUMPING AND NEGLECT OF PEOPLE ................................................................................19
POPULATION CHANGE 1950-1960 .......................................................................................................20
CHAPTER 4: SPATIAL COMPARISON OF RACE AND SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS USING
GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS 1970-1990 .................................................................21
POLARIZATION OF RACE IN 1970.........................................................................................................21
SPATIAL COMPARISON OF RACE 1980 .................................................................................................21
PERCENT OF POPULATION BELOW POVERTY, 1970..............................................................................22
PERCENT OF POPULATION BELOW POVERTY BY RACE, 1980...............................................................22
CHAPTER 5: CORRELATION OF RACE AND INCOME 1950 AND 1960.................................27
ANACOSTIA RIVER ..............................................................................................................................27
POTOMAC RIVER .................................................................................................................................28
CONCLUSION......................................................................................................................................30
APPENDIX A. USING GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS) TO INVETSIGATE
ENVIRONMENTAL INEQUALITY ..................................................................................................31
APPENDIX B: USING MICROSOFT EXCEL TO PERFORM A CORRELATION ANALYSIS
.................................................................................................................................................................33
BIBLIOGRPAHY .................................................................................................................................39
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Ten Largest White Communities in Baton Rouge, LA, 1986 ............ 13
Table 2: Ten Largest Black Communities in Baton Rouge, LA, 1986............. 13
Table 3: Percent Change 1950-1960 ............................................................. 20
Table 4: Correlation of Race and Income, Anacostia River, 1950 .................. 27
Table 5: Correlation of Race and Income, Anacostia River, 1960 .................. 28
Table 6: Correlation of Race and Income, Potomac River, 1950.................... 28
Table 7: Correlation of Race and Income, Potomac River, 1960.................... 29
Table 8: Race and Income, Potomac & Anacostia River, 1950 ...................... 34
Table 9: Race and Income, Anacostia & Potomac River, 1960 ...................... 34
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
ix
CHAPTER 1: THE BREATHTAKING POTOMAC RIVER AND BEGRIMED
ANACOSTIA RIVER
heralded the Potomac River as “one of the most beautiful, historic, and
exciting waterways in the world.”1 Within the same month, the Chesapeake
poster child for abused urban waterways.”2 A year earlier, the Natural
underused.”3 The Potomac River and the Anacostia River are the defining
nowhere in the District are they more than ten miles apart. Yet, the Potomac
began receiving federal funding for river restoration and redevelopment of the
1
Barefoot, Cody. Destination: Washington, DC. Attaché. September 2003.
2
Wennersten, John R. 2003. The Anacostia: Restoring a Ruined River. The Chesapeake Quarterly
Online. Vol 2. Num. 2. <http://www.mdsg.umd.edu/CQ/V02N2/main.html> [assessed 9 October 2003]
3
Natural Resources Defense Council. 2002. Cleaning Up the Anacostia River.
<http://www.nrdc.org/water/pollution/fanacost.asp> [assessed 9 October 2003].
4
Ibid
5
The Sustainable Washington Alliance. 2001. Do You Know? Healthy Rivers and You.
<http://www.swampnet.org/swehag/c.html> [assessed 15 September 2003].
6
Loeb, Vernon. Currents of Change. The Washington Post. 1 December 1996.
1
2
River as an American Heritage River in 1998. This gave the river protection
funding to support local efforts to preserve the history of the community and to
restore the river. Only sixteen rivers in the US have the privilege of this
Anacostia River as one of the twenty most polluted rivers in the United
against consuming fish from the river.9 According to the DC DOH, “the
clean up the sources of pollutants to the river has not taken place…Several
studies sponsored by the District of Columbia have shown high levels of toxic
7
US Environmental Protection Agency. What is the American Heritage Initaitve? American Heritage
Rivers. <http://www.epa.gov/rivers/eo13061.html>. cassessed 23 March 2003]
8
American Rivers. Most Endangered Rivers 1988-2001.
<http://www.amrivers.org/mostendangered/riverlist.htm> [assessed 1 May 2002].
9
District of Columbia Department of Health. Fisheries and Wildlife. Public Health Advisory.
<http://dchealth.dc.gov/services/administration_offices/environmental/services2/fisheries_wildlife/licensin
g_phealthadvisory.shtm> [assessed 25 March 2003].
10
District of Columbia Department of Health. Environmental Health Administration, Water Quality
Division, The District of Columbia Water Quality Assessment Executive Summary, 2000
4
over lenient enforcement of the Clean Water Act of 1972.11 They argue the
Anacostia River does not meet EPA standards on the total maximum daily
visibility.
wastewater system along the basin. During heavy rains, the system is
Friends of the Earth, at least 1.5 billion gallons of sewage per year flows
housing and highway infrastructure has led to this degradation of the river and
the nation’s capital. The federal government has given significant amounts of
funding to restore the Potomac River, while the Anacostia River remains
forgotten. Why does the federal government treat the rivers so differently?
Why has the Potomac River received so much more funding than the
Anacostia River?
11
Friends of the Earth. 2002. Environmentalist Seek Court’s Help to Clean Up Anacostia River. 1
November. <http://www.foe.org/new/releases/1102anacostpr.html> [assessed 25 March 2003].
12
Friends of the Earth. Anacostia River TMDL Briefs: Friends of the Earth v. USEPA, D.C. Cir.
02-1123 and 02-1124
5
color and low socioeconomic status, while the neighborhoods along the
Potomac River are predominately white and high socioeconomic status. This
and the Potomac River, because there are higher percentages of non-white,
not unique to the DC area. In the dawning of a new era, environmental justice
studies from other municipalities. This chapter presents only a small sampling
of the evidence.
The Civil Rights Movement began in the 1960s and the Environmental
Movement began shortly after. Since their inception, laws have been passed
and regulations have been implemented to protect the rights of all people and
burden of exposure to toxic wastes sites and polluted air and water carried by
environmental racism.
Commission for Racial Justice, coined the term environmental racism in 1987.
He defines it as:
6
7
rather socioeconomic status. For example, lower status people move in the
environmental inequality.
distribution of both people of color and low socioeconomic status and the
13
Williams, Christopher. 1998. Environmental Victims. (London, England: Earthscan Publications Ltd),
53
14
Land Loss Prevention Project. September 2003.
<http://www.landloss.org/Commonly%20Used%20Environmental%20Justice%20Definitions.htm>
[assessed 12 March 2000].
8
communities with one or more toxic wastes sites.17 A 1990 report by the
Greenpeace found that communities with existing incinerators have 89% more
In 1987, a study by the Commission for Racial Justice found that 60%
of African Americans and Hispanics and greater than 50% of Asians and
Native Americans live in areas of one or more toxic wastes sites.19 This
means that three out of five African Americans and Hispanics live in
‘uncontrolled environments’. The report also found that there was an uneven
Recovery Act. In areas where the residents were mostly white, the penalties
were 500% higher than areas where people of color are the greater
15
Westra, Laura and Peter S. Wenz. 1995. Faces of Environmental Racism. (Lanham, Maryland: Rowan
and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.), 4.
16
Miller, Char and Hal Rothman.1997. Out of the Woods. (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press),
201.
17
Bryant, Bunyan and Paul Mohai.1992. Race and Incidence of Environmental Hazards. (San Francisco,
CA: Westview Press),15.
18
Westra, Laura and Peter S. Wenz. 1995. Faces of Environmental Racism. (Lanham, Maryland: Rowan
and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.), 6.
19
Williams, Christopher.1998. Environmental Victims. (London, England: Earthscan Publications Ltd.),
53.
9
population).
Source: Mapquest
encompasses eight states, identified that three out of four landfills were in
areas where African Americans were the majority.21 The nation’s largest toxic
waste landfill, with waste from 45 states and foreign countries, is located in
In Houston, six of eight municipal incinerators and all five landfills are in
20
Bullard, Robert. 1990. Dumping in Dixie: Race, Class and Environmental Quality. (Boulder, CO:
Westview Press), 40.
21
Foreman, Christopher Jr. 1998. The Promise and Peril of Environmental Justice. (Washington, DC:
Brookings Institution Press), 18-19.
10
American community.22
Health Affects
Environmental deterioration is a hazard to human health, particularly to
people of color living in toxic areas. People of color and lower socioeconomic
status have greater health problems and lower life expectancies than well-off
white populations. Given the EPA calculates air toxins alone account for
greater than 2,000 cases of cancer each year, then surely this burden unfairly
and Hispanic communities is lead. Lead poisoning affects four million children
each year. It is three times more likely to affect African American children than
white children.24 A 1988 report by the Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry found that greater than 67% of urban children living in
households with an income of less than $6,000 had a blood lead level greater
these areas are children of color. For white children living in households with
the same income level the percentage was only 36%.25 The primary sources
of lead in minority communities are paint, urban soil, dust, and contaminated
drinking water.
22
Bryant, Bunyan and Paul Mohai. 1992. Race and Incidence of Environmental Hazards. (San
Francisco, CA: Westview Press), 13.
23
Ibid, 126.
24
Williams, Christopher. 1998. Environmental Victims. (London, England: Earthscan Publications Ltd.),
54.
25
Foreman, Christopher Jr. 1998. The Promise and Peril of Environmental Justice. (Washington, DC:
Brookings Institution Press), 79.
11
Asthma affects fourteen million people each year according to the American
deaths, but are only 12% of the total population. The primary causes of
asthma in African Americans are lung toxicities of metals (lead, mercury, and
Case Studies
Several independent case studies have been performed across the
United States. They have all had similar findings that African American,
degraded environment. Below are three that have been adapted from their
original text.
Chestertown, PA
In 2000, the population was about 4600 people of which African Americans
are about 65% of the population. However, they account for the 95% of the
residents living near waste facilities. Chestertown is also home to the fourth
26
Ibid, 83.
27
Committee on Environmental Justice. 1999. Toward Environmental Justice. (Washington, DC:
National Academy Press),15.
12
stations, and hazardous waste sites. The African American children of this
area receive lead exposure higher than the national average. Chestertown
also has the highest percentage of low birth rate; and the infant mortality rate
Chicago, IL
Altgeld Greens. The community is 70% African American and 11% Hispanic.
Hazardous wastes facilities, smelters, seven chemical plants, and five steel
plants encircle the community.29 There are also over one hundred industrial
plants, fifty active or closed waste dumps and 90% of the city’s landfills. In the
well water, there are traces of cyanide, benzene, toluene, and a high
and asthma.” 30
Baton Rouge, LA
A study in 1986 of the ten largest white communities and the ten largest
hazardous waste sites. The following tables show the racial differences in
28
Pennsylvania Environmental Network. Environmental Racism in Chestertown. [assessed 25 March
2000]. Available from World Wide Web: <http://penweb.org/Chester>.
29
Westra, Laura and Peter S. Wenz. 1995. Faces of Environmental Racism. (Lanham, Maryland: Rowan
and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.), 6.
30
Committee on Environmental Justice. 1999. Toward Environmental Justice. (Washington, DC:
National Academy Press), 29.
13
wastes sites and waste per capita. Only five hazardous waste sites exist in
communities where the population is predominately white, but there are fifteen
in predominately black communities. The zip code that has the most toxic
waste sites is 95% black. The number of residents per waste site in the
Total 124,000 5
* Sites in communities with population under 1,000 were not considered
Total 110,100 15
14
These case studies show that people of color bear the environmental
lower property values. How do racism and class differences factor into
preservation and a slew of public and private policies transformed many of the
areas along the Potomac River into high socioeconomic status, white
Park, Foxhall, Burleith, and Georgetown had been combined as a county they
would have been one of the richest municipalities in the US. 31 During this
same period, neighborhoods along the Anacostia River were moving in the
socioeconomic status.
that real estate agents offered white customers better mortgage rates, lower
31
Lewis, Davis L. 1976. District of Columbia: A Bicentennial History. (New York: W.W. Norton &
Company, Inc.), 167.
15
16
and income levels to one that is uniform with majority high economic status
century, Georgetown was home to former slaves and whites who worked in
the industries along the river. Today, it encompasses prime real estate along
in the US. It is also one of the most expensive areas to live within the district.
Like other cities in the US, Washington had a transitioning period from
rural to urban. Starting in the 1920’s many residents of the Georgetown area
realized the potential value of the real estate, particularly along the waterfront.
32
Ibid, 123
33
Gale, Dennis E. 1987. Washington, D.C.: Inner-City Revitalization and Minority Suburbanization.
(Philadelphia: Temple University Press), 52
17
wealthy whites.34 This was the catalyst for redevelopment of the once
industrial community.
Between the late 1930’s and the early 1950’s, developers continued to
invade and develop the area. This influx of investment in Georgetown began
increasing property values, which in turn increased the property taxes and
no longer afford the taxes and tenants could no longer afford the higher rent.
color and lower socioeconomic status. The House Committee on the District
of Columbia initiated the act and Congress passed the act. It placed
Georgetown under the jurisdiction of the US Department of the Interior with the
These policies and regulations forced out families, mostly black, who
did not have the means to comply with the policies.36 The black population
34
Lesko, Kathhleen, Valerie Babb and Carroll Gibbs. 1991. Black Georgetown Remembered.
(Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press), 79
35
US Congress House, H.R. 7670 Hearing Before the House. Committee on the District of Columbia. 22
June 1950. Record Group #233 Civil Archives Division, National Archives, Washington, DC.
36
Lesko, Kathhleen, Valerie Babb and Carroll Gibbs. 1991. Black Georgetown Remembered.
(Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press), 97
37
Ibid
18
Starting in the 1940’s, revitalization policies and master plans transformed this
neighborhood into the cultural center for DC. These policies come at the price
of relocating residents.
Agency (RLA). This agency was primarily responsible for the redevelopment
master plan to Congress that would effectively force out blacks from the SW
They sought to redevelop 330 of 427 acres of land into opera houses, malls,
music halls, and monuments. Private companies in addition to the federal and
district governments financed the $185 million, five-year project.39 The federal
plan.40
38
Lewis, Davis L. 1976. District of Columbia: A Bicentennial History. (New York: W.W. Norton &
Company, Inc.),135
39
Ibid p. 135-136
40
Gale, Dennis E. 1987. Washington, DC: Inner-City revitalization and Minority Suburbanization.
(Philadelphia: Temple University Press), 58
19
along the Anacostia River. This whole area, including several sub-districts, is
rural area to into one with high-density housing projects. Through the
seventies, the neighborhoods along the Anacostia River had some of the
In the 1950’s, the government changed the zoning laws for Anacostia to
multi-family units only.43 This created new high-density areas along the
grew, the government did little to upgrade the infrastructure to sustain the new
development.
41
Lewis, Davis L.1976. District of Columbia: A Bicentennial History. (New York: W.W. Norton &
Company, Inc.), 134
42
Williams, Brett. Gentrifying Water and Selling Jim Crow. Urban Anthropology. 2002. Vol 31 num. 1
p.96.
43
Ibid, 96-97
20
around each of the rivers between 1950 and 1960. The table shows the
percent change between in this decade for the percent of the non-white
The percent of the non-white residents increased around the Anacostia River
almost three times the percentage it decreased around the Potomac River.
income increased around the Anacostia only about third of what it increased
around the Potomac. The result after one decade is the Anacostia River area
has a large portion of non-white residents, while the Potomac River area has a
44
I translated the median income for 1950 into 1960 dollars in order to determine the percent
change between 1950 and 1960.
CHAPTER 4: SPATIAL COMPARISON OF RACE AND SOCIOECONOMIC
STATUS USING GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS 1970-1990
Did the polarization of race and class created by public policy continue
in the latter decades? Using the 1970 and 1980 census, I examined the areas
within one-mile of each river based on race and poverty.45 The one-mile
buffer roughly translates into a 20-minute walk (see Appendix A for the
The majority of the census tracts within one-mile of the Anacostia River are
communities of color. The only tract that is not community of color is the
Boeing Air Force Base census tract. Along the Potomac River, all of the
percentage of people of color. Even the Boeing Air Force Base increased in
there is no longer a population living there. There are two other census tracts
45
In 1970 and 1980, I use percent of population below poverty as the socioeconomic indicator
for each track
21
22
census.
below the poverty level. The communities around the Potomac have a
around the Anacostia River is below poverty. Three tracts at the southernmost
part of the river have between 39 and 69% of the population below poverty.
Three tracts at the northern end have 22 - 38% of the total population living
below poverty.
River, 6 - 10% and 21 - 50% of total population are non-white residents below
poverty for most of the tracts. There are four tracts where the majority of the
policy transformed many of the neighborhoods around each of the rivers. The
areas around the Anacostia became increasing people of color and poor. As
this transformation occurs, one has to ask if race or income was driving these
Therefore, the decisions are harming people because they are poor people of
color.
Anacostia River
In 1950 and 1960, I found there is a negative correlation between race
and income in the census tracts around the Anacostia River. As the percent of
46
See Appendix B for data tables
27
28
coefficient (rcalc) for 1950 is -0.756. The critical value (rcrit) is 0.553, based on
a two-tailed p-value and a 95% confidence interval. For 1960, rcrit is less than
0.361. Since the absolute value of rcalc is greater than rcrit, the null hypothesis
is rejected for 1950 and 1960. Therefore, rcalc is statistically significant for both
years.
model. After doing a correlation analysis for 1950 and 1960, I found there is
Potomac River
In 1950, I also found a significant negative correlation between race
and income in the census tracts around the Potomac River. For 1960, the
47
See Appendix B for data tables
48
See Appendix B for data tables
29
The rcrit is 0.532 and 0.576 for 1950 and 1960 respectively. In 1950, the
rcalc is greater than the rcrit. Therefore, it is statistically significant. In 1960, the
rcalc is less than the rcrit, which means the null hypothesis cannot be rejected.
of total population and median income. For both years, I found there was no
statistical significance. The rcalc was less than the rcrit, which mean the null
49
See Appendix B for data tables
CONCLUSION
This paper resolves around three loosely stated hypotheses: (1) that
(2) that class and race are closely intercorrelated, and (3) that Washington,
of the rivers. One cannot isolate race or class when looking at the causes of
both contributed to the polarization by race and poverty around each river.
people moved into the degraded neighborhoods. Poor people and people of
has given significantly greater funding for Potomac River restoration than to
the Anacostia River restoration. The Potomac River is now home to yacht
clubs and high-end restaurants and retail. The Anacostia River remains
30
APPENDIX A. USING GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS) TO
INVETSIGATE ENVIRONMENTAL INEQUALITY
GIS allows for visual representation of the inequalities that exist. This
paper examines spatially the polarization of race and poverty. There were
three basic steps taken to create map layouts to show DC in 1970 and 1980.
1. Data collection
2. Data analysis
3. Map creation and manipulation
Data Collection
Most of the data used on this project is from the US Department of
Commerce Census Bureau Geography Division. All of the base maps are
from the Census Bureau. I downloaded the rivers and military base data from
Data Analysis
After obtaining the demographic data for 1970 and 1980, it required
some analysis. My analysis looks at race and percent of the population below
poverty level. I only considered these two variables in order to see a change
black, or white. While in the 1980, the census defined race as white, black,
31
32
The second reason for this identification system is that the number of
non-whites who are also non-black is a small portion of the population in 1970
analyze the data. For each of the categories looking at race, I added a column
for the total non-white population, which was a summation of the Black, Asian,
Native American, and Other populations. I then divided this number by the
Map Creation
DC is not a state; therefore, it has no counties per se. I used the 1970
and 1980 census tracts shapefiles from the US Census for the base map for
each respective year. Instead of analyzing all of DC, I used a one-mile buffer
around each river. I chose one-mile buffer, because it roughly translates into a
twenty-minute walk. After the buffer was created, the census tract layer was
clipped based on this buffer using the geoprocessing tool in ArcGIS. I used
create a buffer, I printed the map for 1950 and selected the census tracts that
were approximately one-mile from each river. For the 1960 data, I used the
same tracts as 1950, which includes the tract changes from 1950 to 1960.
This is why there are more census tracts in the 1960 data tables. In order to
perform the correlation analysis, I used the data analysis tool in Microsoft
Excel. I used a 95% confidence interval and a two-tailed p-value for all the
correlations.
In 1960, the area around the Potomac River had three census tracts
without any data for median income. For the correlation analysis, these data
50
Kachigan, Sam Kash. 1991. Multivariate Statistical Analysis. (New York: Radius Press).
33
34
For the correlation analysis, I used median income and the non-white
did not drive the model, I also did a correlation analysis using total population
and median income. I found the correlation of total population and median
For the final analysis I examined the dataset for the Potomac and
Anacostia Rivers together for 1950 and 1960. In 1950, there is a statistically
1950 Data for the Census Tracts around the Anacostia River51
Percent of Total
Census Non- Total Median Non-
Tract White white* Black Residents Income White White* Black
63 2250 3205 3174 5455 1924 41.2 58.8 58.19
64 179 4413 4410 4592 2506 3.9 96.1 96.04
68 6390 3971 3935 10361 3039 61.7 38.3 37.98
69 2991 2196 2173 5187 2924 57.7 42.3 41.89
71 3203 1012 997 4215 2935 76.0 24.0 23.65
72 696 6062 6039 6758 2234 10.3 89.7 89.36
73 33905 2721 2550 36626 3385 92.6 7.4 6.96
74 5057 10210 10180 15267 2489 33.1 66.9 66.68
75 7404 868 868 8272 3941 89.5 10.5 10.49
76 18906 99 61 19005 4435 99.5 0.5 0.32
77 20685 8861 8832 29546 3946 70.0 30.0 29.89
78 8785 27838 27781 36623 3011 24.0 76.0 75.86
79 4948 6046 6022 10994 2995 45.0 55.0 54.78
89 2882 7929 7920 10811 3218 26.7 73.3 73.26
90 2251 581 572 2832 3765 79.5 20.5 20.20
Total 120532 86012 85514 206544 3116 58.4 41.6 41.40
1950 Data for the Census Tracts around the Potomac River52
Percent of Total
Census Non- Total Median Non-
Tract White white* Black Residents Income White white* Black
1 6366 1292 1265 7658 3869 83.1 16.9 16.5
2 6248 623 576 6871 1495 90.9 9.1 8.4
3 7087 65 53 7152 4131 99.1 0.9 0.7
4 1412 142 93 1554 3833 90.9 9.1 6.0
7 6713 142 105 6855 4858 97.9 2.1 1.5
8 5204 209 177 5413 4472 96.1 3.9 3.3
9 5295 283 276 5578 5065 94.9 5.1 4.9
10 11378 78 47 11456 4902 99.3 0.7 0.4
41 4271 256 232 4527 3210 94.3 5.7 5.1
54 5257 1798 1752 7055 3000 74.5 25.5 24.8
55 5241 3457 3409 8698 2516 60.3 39.7 39.2
56 1735 4130 4083 5865 2053 29.6 70.4 69.6
57 8535 1350 1291 9885 3053 86.3 13.7 13.1
62 2670 1770 1752 4440 2490 60.1 39.9 39.5
Total 77412 15595 15111 93007 3496 83.2 16.8 16.2
51
U.S. Census Bureau. 1952. 1950 Census of Population and Housing, Census Tracts, Washington,
DC. HA 201-P82 Chapter 59 Washington: The Bureau.
52
Ibid
36
1960 Data for the Census Tracts around the Anacostia River53
Percent of Total
Census Non- Median Non-
Tract White White* Black Total Income White white* Black
63 829 17 1514 2360 3484 35.1 0.7 64.2
64 42 2 3218 3262 2912 1.3 0.1 98.7
68 2010 47 8131 10188 5114 19.7 0.5 79.8
69 914 12 3971 4897 4459 18.7 0.2 81.1
71 1061 32 2936 4029 4731 26.3 0.8 72.9
72 513 29 5009 5551 2998 9.2 0.5 90.2
73.1 4195 281 337 4813 5250 87.2 5.8 7.0
73.2 5461 46 38 5545 5902 98.5 0.8 0.7
73.3 4342 76 63 4481 6138 96.9 1.7 1.4
73.4 4652 111 498 5261 5246 88.4 2.1 9.5
73.5 7007 141 1901 9049 5100 77.4 1.6 21.0
73.6 6511 76 63 6650 6386 97.9 1.1 0.9
73.7 6285 48 39 6372 6474 98.6 0.8 0.6
73.8 358 6 680 1044 0 34.3 0.6 65.1
74.1 1391 42 4963 6396 3430 21.7 0.7 77.6
74.2 949 15 5228 6192 5238 15.3 0.2 84.4
74.3 166 15 12405 12586 5214 1.3 0.1 98.6
75 6449 68 2700 9217 5583 70.0 0.7 29.3
76.1 5865 46 23 5934 6467 98.8 0.8 0.4
76.2 6515 24 28 6567 7777 99.2 0.4 0.4
76.3 5314 20 7 5341 7955 99.5 0.4 0.1
77.1 5165 8 1045 6218 5794 83.1 0.1 16.8
77.2 4741 34 1462 6237 7992 76.0 0.5 23.4
77.3 2910 54 3456 6420 5227 45.3 0.8 53.8
77.4 619 55 10727 11401 5685 5.4 0.5 94.1
77.5 18 9 6311 6338 5150 0.3 0.1 99.6
78.1 155 5 7951 8111 3937 1.9 0.1 98.0
78.2 303 19 6329 6651 6597 4.6 0.3 95.2
78.3 10 8 6011 6029 4570 0.2 0.1 99.7
78.4 3 5 4726 4734 4538 0.1 0.1 99.8
78.5 16 8 8256 8280 5348 0.2 0.1 99.7
78.6 11 8 10036 10055 4322 0.1 0.1 99.8
79 252 17 9292 9561 4718 2.6 0.2 97.2
89 101 3 10617 10721 4944 0.9 0.0 99.0
90 1321 83 5305 6709 6618 19.7 1.2 79.1
Total 86454 1470 145276 233200 5180 37.1 0.6 62.3
53
U.S. Census Bureau. 1962. 1960 Census of Population and Housing, Census Tracts, Washington,
DC. HA 201-P822. Washington: The Bureau.
37
1960 Data for the Census Tracts around the Potomac River54
Percent of Total
Census Non- Median Non-
Tract White white* Black Total Income White white* Black
1 5583 59 321 5963 11384 93.6 1.0 5.4
2 5594 69 60 5723 9780 97.7 1.2 1.0
3 6303 78 34 6415 8649 98.3 1.2 0.5
4 1192 30 58 1280 19815 93.1 2.3 4.5
7 8330 97 121 8548 10835 97.4 1.1 1.4
8 6073 53 109 6235 13756 97.4 0.9 1.7
9 6533 53 129 6715 14269 97.3 0.8 1.9
10 11554 95 49 11698 11096 98.8 0.8 0.4
41 3209 80 141 3430 11967 93.6 2.3 4.1
54.001 2030 76 518 2624 5629 77.4 2.9 19.7
54.002 758 11 62 831 0 91.2 1.3 7.5
55 4046 115 2021 6182 4804 65.4 1.9 32.7
56 3082 63 651 3796 7855 81.2 1.7 17.1
57.001 5102 57 221 5380 0 94.8 1.1 4.1
57.002 1376 11 17 1404 4786 98.0 0.8 1.2
62 49 0 50 99 0 49.5 0.0 50.5
Total 70814 947 4562 76323 8414 92.8 1.2 6.0
54
Ibid
38
Median
Income Total Residents
Median Income 1
Total Residents 0.327117122 1
rcrit =0.553, the null hypothesis is accepted.
Median
Income Total Residents
Median Income 1
Total Residents 0.083823643 1
rcrit =0.576, the null hypothesis is accepted.
Median
Income Total Residents
Median Income 1
Total Residents 0.287371171 1
rcrit < 0.361, the null hypothesis is accepted.
Median
Income Total Residents
Median Income 1
Total Residents 0.338585586 1
rcrit = 0.497, the null hypothesis is accepted.
BIBLIOGRPAHY
Friends of the Earth. Anacostia River TMDL Briefs: Friends of the Earth v.
USEPA, D.C. Cir. 02-1123 and 02-1124
39
40
Lesko, Kathhleen, Valerie Babb and Carroll Gibbs. 1991. Black Georgetown
Remembered. (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press).
Miller, Char and Hal Rothman.1997. Out of the Woods. (Pittsburgh: University
of Pittsburgh Press).
U.S. Census Bureau. 1952. 1950 Census of Population and Housing, Census
Tracts, Washington, DC. HA 201-P82 Chapter 59 Washington: The
Bureau.
U.S. Census Bureau. 1962. 1960 Census of Population and Housing, Census
Tracts, Washington, DC. HA 201-P822. Washington: The Bureau.
US Congress House, H.R. 7670 Hearing Before the House. Committee on the
District of Columbia. 22 June 1950. Record Group #233 Civil Archives
Division, National Archives, Washington, DC.
Williams, Brett. Gentrifying Water and Selling Jim Crow. Urban Anthropology.
2002. Vol 31 num. 1 p.96.