Reducing Bacterial Contamination In Waterways


Published on

Presentation at the River Network "River Rally" conference in Baltimore, Maryland May 29th - June 1st. Our workshop discussed Milwaukee Riverkeeper\'s IDDE program specifically focused on bacteria monitoring for human sewage, using genetic testing to determine the presence of Bacteroides, a specific human marker for human sewage.

We discuss how many stormwater outfalls we found containing human sewage, our documentation of the data, the use of GIS and Google Maps and Google Earth for displaying the data and how to move forward to fix this serious human health risk and pollution problem.

Cheryl Nenn and I co-presented this presentation/workshop. Slides 11 - 32 were presented by me, while Cheryl presented slides 2 - 10 and 33 - 34.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Reducing Bacterial Contamination In Waterways

  1. 1. Reducing Bacterial Contamination in Waterways<br />Cheryl Nenn: Milwaukee Riverkeeper<br />Jason Schroeder: Water Quality Assistant<br />
  2. 2. Milwaukee Riverkeeper<br />Our mission is to protect water quality and wildlife habitat and advocate for sound land use in the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic River Watersheds. Our vision is for fishable and swimmable waters in our rivers and Lake Michigan.<br />
  3. 3. We are the Milwaukee Riverkeeper®<br />One of 188+ Waterkeepers around the world licensed by the Waterkeeper Alliance, based in New York<br />We are an independent watchdog for the river<br />We respond to citizen concerns and complaints<br />We find solutions to environmental problems affecting our waterways<br />We have a physical presence on the river, coordinate citizen based stream monitoring, and bacterial monitoring/illicit discharge detection<br /><br />
  4. 4. SEWRPC Regional Water Quality Plan<br />Riverkeeper served on the Technical Advisory Committee<br />Menomonee model robust with data at 18 assessment points (USGS, DNR, MMSD, citizens)<br />Modeling showed fecal coliform levels in one section of the Menomonee River (between Burleigh and 60th) that regularly exceeded the recreational use standard (200 colonies/100 mls) by 15 times.<br />Max fecal coliform was 1,500 times the standard!<br />
  5. 5. Diagnosing a Problem<br />Modeling showed bacterial levels much higher than anticipated from stormwater runoff alone—subsurface flows suspected<br />Model predictions did not calibrate with field collected data, and bacteria were high during “dry” weather in this section <br />Likely source of bacteria from aged and failing sanitary sewage and stormwater infrastructure (illicit discharges and cross connections)<br />
  6. 6. Why Fecal Coliform?<br />Fecal coliform was selected for modeling because they can be used as an indicator of human sewage<br />We have water quality standards for fecal coliform in WI (NR 102)<br />Large amount of data existed for fecal coliform due to regulatory standard.<br />Fecal used as recreational use standard for beach closings (E. coli standard also exists)<br />
  7. 7. Why Fecal Coliform?<br />Fecal coliform as well as E. coli serve as indicators of a broader range of threats to human health including pathogens associated with human sewage and animal waste<br /><ul><li>Pathogens include viruses and bacteria such as Salmonella spp., Vibrio cholerae, Shigella dysenteries, and protozoa such as Cryptosporidium and Giardia. </li></li></ul><li>SEWRPC Recommendations<br />Fecal not sufficient indicator of threat to human health<br />SEWRPC recommended new program to focus on pathogens from human sources that are most likely to be harmful to human health (animal sources could also pose threats)<br />SEWRPC recommended aggressive program for detection and elimination of illicit discharges (also required under national and State stormwater regs)<br />Also recommended human health and risk assessments to assess pathogens in stormwater runoff (exposure routes, dose-response, etc)<br />
  8. 8. E. coli, Enterococcus, Bacteroides, oh my<br />E. coli — found in many animals/short lived/but can be counted “dead”<br />Enterococcus — more human specific/lives longer/less accurate <br />Bacteroides marker—common marker that is unique to humans and not found in other hosts (cows, raccoons, etc).<br />Sometimes genes can be inhibited by other pollutants (heavy metals, etc); DNA extraction can be inefficient<br />DNA<br />Gene target<br />
  9. 9. Overall Project Overview<br />Where should we study? 8 mile area of Menomonee River and adjacent tributaries that discharge to this area<br />What parameters should we monitor for? E. coli, Enterococcus, Bacteroides (for selected “suspicious” outfalls)<br />Who will test (who will pay), when, and how? Riverkeeper does sample collection; UWM-GLWI does testing; tests during dry and wet weather<br />
  10. 10. Planning phase<br />GIS data acquisition - can be a lengthy process<br />Obtain data for study area<br />Does area cover multiple municipalities? (One stop shopping?)<br />Types of GIS data<br />Stormwater outfalls (local Sewerage District)<br />Storm sewers (local Sewerage District)<br />Aerial imagery (local planning department)<br />Hydrology layers (State DNR, USDA Geospatial Data Gateway)<br />
  11. 11.
  12. 12. Planning phase continued…<br />GIS analysis to prioritize outfalls<br />Which outfalls drain the largest areas?<br />Which outfalls are likely to contain human bacteria?<br />Residential areas<br />Industrial areas<br />Agriculture areas<br />Print maps for identification & field sampling<br />Send coordinates from GIS to GPS for hard to find outfalls<br />Create form for field sampling<br />
  13. 13. Form modified from: Center for Watershed Protection @<br />
  14. 14. Sampling methods – Year One<br />Grab all outfalls running in dry weather <br />Grab as many outfalls during rain events as possible<br />Sample directly at outfall via sampling pole<br />Samples immediately stored on ice to preserve bacteria<br />
  15. 15. Sampling methods continued<br />GLWI cultures for E. coli and Enterococcus on plates<br />Count bacteria colonies<br />High bacteria counts are candidates for DNA testing for human marker (Bacteroides)<br />
  16. 16. Resample/verification<br />Many samples have questionable results<br />Diluted from stormwater or interference from organic substances, metals, etc…<br />
  17. 17. Further testing/retesting<br />Sample all outfalls not tested in wet weather during the first year<br />Classify tested outfalls as:<br />“BAD” – need no further testing<br />“GOOD” – need no further testing (requires 2 negative results)<br />“QUESTIONABLE” – need further testing <br />Prioritize questionable outfalls for retesting:<br />Outfalls with highest bacteria counts and negative for human marker<br />Outfalls with largest drainage area for 2nd year<br />
  18. 18. Reasons for using a GIS<br />Repository for outfall results and field notes<br />
  19. 19. Reasons for using a GIS continued…<br />Provide analysis for outfall prioritization<br />Produce professional quality maps<br />Provide documentation to Municipalities<br />Export to Google Maps or Google Earth for public viewing<br />Google Earth (basic KML editor)<br />Import KML to Google Maps<br />
  20. 20. Use of Google Earth<br />Basic functions of a GIS to the desktop for free<br />Satellite imagery already there<br />Easy to share GIS data for others to view<br />Export layers from GIS as a KML file<br />KML file is an overlay on Google Earth<br />Publish KML file on web site or email sharing<br />Use as a KML editor<br />Display and edit text, data, and images easily<br />
  21. 21.
  22. 22. “Export to KML” Google Earth or Maps<br />
  23. 23.
  24. 24. Google Maps and alternatives<br />Constantly getting easier to make maps<br />Advantage: Anyone can view – no special software<br />Quick access<br />Balloons allow display of data, pictures, text<br />Promote our work to the general public, fundraise<br />Can integrate our Citizen Based Stream Monitoring and Cleanup Sites<br />
  25. 25. Bacteria statistics<br />93 samples analyzed for E. coli & Enterococcus<br />E. coli ranged from 0 – 630,000 and greater (Too Numerous To Count)<br />Enterococcus ranged from 0 – 1,300,000<br />Median = 2,620<br />Mean = 48,941<br />Geometric Mean = 3,465<br />
  26. 26.
  27. 27. Bacteroides statistics<br />144 total outfalls identified<br />93 total samples analyzed<br />48 during baseflow<br />45 during wet weather<br />74 unique outfalls (19 samples – duplicates)<br />46 during baseflow & wet weather<br />28 during wet weather only<br />(40.5%) of outfalls sampled tested positive for human Bacteroides (30 of 74 outfalls)<br />
  28. 28.
  29. 29.
  30. 30. GIS Resources<br />GIS software:<br />ArcGIS desktop for non-profits (ArcView, $175, 3D Analyst, Spatial Analyst, $195) -<br />ArcGIS grants program (ArcView, ArcEditor, ArcINFO, extensions - Minimum $100) -<br />GRASS GIS (Open source, free) -<br />Google Earth (free) -<br />GIS tools:<br />Minnesota DNR GPS tool for ArcGIS (free) -<br />ESRI Export to KML script (City of Portland, free download) -<br />KML to Shapefile converter (online web browser, free) -<br />Shapefile to KML converter (free download) -<br />GIS data:<br />USDA Geospatial Data Gateway -<br />U.S. Geodata –<br />
  31. 31. Working with Municipalities<br />Opportunity for partnerships with municipalities for illicit discharge detection and public outreach <br />Help municipalities prioritize repairs<br />Outreach to private homeowners regarding need for lateral repairs (e.g. 78th and Mt. Vernon); city pilot project<br />Encouraging/supporting requests for stimulus, SRF funding, Great Lakes Restoration funding, etc.<br />Milwaukee area alone needs $1B in sewer repairs<br />
  32. 32. Stimulus/Infrastructure Funding<br />State of WI SRF program: $200M per year<br />Stimulus funds for wastewater in 2009: $106M <br />Requested “shovel ready” projects for SRF in Wisconsin for 2009 (Intent to Apply): $1.2B<br />Need for additional funds<br />Need for new technologies (pipe sealing, end of the pipe treatments, etc)? <br />
  33. 33. Help is on the way?! <br />Southeastern Wisconsin Watershed Trust (SWWT) - goal to implement programs and practices that will most cost-effectively improve water quality<br />Joyce funded NGOs — received funding to help create and implement watershed restoration plans (based on SEWRPC plans) for the Menomonee and KK Watersheds.<br />Milwaukee 7 Water Council – focused on advancing technologies to improve water quality/making Milwaukee a freshwater tech “hub”and UN Global Compact City<br />UW-Milwaukee - investing in new school of Freshwater Sciences and expansion of Great Lakes Water Institute<br />And not a moment too soon!<br />
  34. 34. Milwaukee Riverkeeper<br />Phone: (414) 287-0207<br />Cheryl Nenn x229<br /><br />Jason Schroeder x235 <br /><br /><br />
  35. 35. Bacteria Resources<br />Great Lakes Water Institute (McLellan Lab) - <br />Bacteria research publications:<br />Bower, P.A., Scopel, C.O., Jensen, E.T., Depas, M.M. & McLellan, S.L. 2005. Detection of genetic markers of fecal indicator bacteria in Lake Michigan and determination of their relationship to Escherichia coli densities using standard microbiological methods.Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 71(12): 8305-8313 <br />McLellan, S.L. 2004. Genetic diversity of Escherichia coli isolated from urban rivers and beach water. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.70(8):4858-65 <br />McLellan, S.L., Daniels, A.D. & Salmore, A.K. 2003. Genetic characterization of Escherichia coli populations from host sources of fecal pollution by using DNA fingerprinting. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.69(5):2587-94<br />