Surface Disposal Michael Ells Exit Strategies Conference 2010 Sustainable Summits Initiative

1. Exit Strategies Conference
Smearing as
a Method
of Feces
Disposal +
Public
Health
Impacts
Mike Ells
Professor
Emeritus
Ferris State
University
Big Rapids,
Michigan

2. The Public Health Impacts of
Surface Disposal as a Method of
Feces Disposal in Alpine,
Temperate Forest and Arid
Environments
Michael D. Ells, RS, MSPH, DAAS
Professor Emeritus
Environmental Health and Safety Mgmt.
Ferris State University

3. History…
 1995 – Study of surface water
runoff in the Muir Snowfield, Mt.
Rainier National Park.
 1999 – Study of Smearing on rocks
in Fell Fields within the Muir
Snowfield.
 2000 – Study of Smearing on rocks
in a Temperate Forest and in an
Arid Environment.

5. 1995 The Muir Snowfield
Study Site
Climbers, et al
Camp Muir
10,200’
9,400’
8,200’

6. History...
 1995 – Since the urine from the Solar
Toilets at Camp Muir is released to the
underdrain of the snowfield, MORA
wanted to know if surface water within
the snowfield was contaminated with
this discharge.
 A study the fecal microorganism,
chloride and TDS content of runoff from
the snowfield was completed.

7.  I found NONE!
 The question then became…
 Where did “IT” go?

8. Predicted
Flowpath
Analysis (GIS)
indicate that
we may have
been sampling
in the WRONG
AREA!

9. When the “urge”
Strikes!
Feces in the
Middle of the
Trail to
Camp Muir,
22 May

10. Two Days
Later the
Trail had
Moved to
“Accommodate”
the Pile!
24 May

11. 1995 ...
 At about this same time NOLS
began suggesting surface
disposal (smearing) as a
method of human waste
“disposal.”

12. History ...
 Additionally, there was no
Public Health data to support
this practice.

13. The 1999 Project Had Two Parts...
Part 1: What happens to
feces and fecal
microorganisms deposited
in snow in the Alpine
Environment...

14. Part 2: The Public Health
Impact of Smearing as a
Human Waste Disposal
Alternative in the Alpine
Environment.

15. Part 1...
 6 Specimens were set out on 3
June 1999.
 2 “Deep” specimens
 2 “Steep” specimens
 2 “Flat” Specimens

16. Deep Specimens...
 The objective was to sample
snows beneath the feces to
determine the downward
migration of fecal
microorganisms.

17. Steep Specimens...
 The objective here was to
determine the rate and extent of
down slope migration of fecal
microorganisms on a steep
snowfield surface.

18. Flat Specimens...
 The objective here was to
determine the rate and extent of
migrations of fecal
microorganisms on a flat
snowfield surface.

19. Deep-1
2 June 1999
Note migration
of color from
fecal specimen

20. Deep 2, June 3, 1999, Closer
(sorry)…Note Staining

21. 18 Days of Exposure
Note the “Gray” area circled.
Evidence of significant desiccation.

22. SNOWFALL BURY’S SAMPLES…
 A snowfall in early July buried the
samples and we had to re-establish
the 6 samples.
 All 1995 data was taken from the 6
new samples.

23. Sample Collection...
 Samples were generally
collected late morning or early
afternoon.

24. Analysis...
 Samples were analyzed 24
hours following collection.
 Plates were counted 24, 48, or
72 hours later : (FC, E.c.), (FS),
and (P.a.)

25. Findings...
 Fecal bacteria are washed off to
the surrounding snow or ice.
 This does not appear to last
long nor are the numbers high.

26. Snow Surface
D-1 D-2
6”
12”
FC FS
14 34
FC FS
22 640
FC FS
34 8
8/1/99
8/29/99
8/1/99
Downward Migration of Fecal Coliform
and Fecal Streptococci

27. Aerial (Overhead) view of
S-2 Specimen (FC, FS)
(8/29/99 - 41 Days of Exposure)
ND, ND
ND, ND
ND, ND
ND, ND
ND, ND
All Locations, All Dates = ND FC, FS, E.d., and P.a.
INTERPRETATION: % Slope has no effect on the
migration of fecal microorganisms!

28. Aerial (Overhead) view of S-2 Specimen
(Fecal coliform, Fecal streptococci)
(8/29/99 - 41 Days of Exposure)
ND, ND
ND, ND
ND, ND
ND, ND
ND, ND
All Locations, All Dates = ND FC, FS, E.c., and P.a.
ADDITIONAL INTERPRETATION: Wind plays little to
no role in the translocation of fecal microorganisms!

29. Aerial (Overhead) view of
F-1 Specimen (FC, FS)
(8/29/99 - 41 Days of Exposure)
Upslope
Downslope
Left Right6”12” ND, ND
ND, ND
ND, 2
ND, ND
ND, ND

30. Fecal Organisms in Feces vs Exposure Time
F-2 (Surface Specimen)
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
10000000
100000000
1000000000
7/20/99
7/27/99
8/3/99
8/10/99
8/17/99
8/24/99
8/31/99
9/7/99
Date
LogofSurvivingMicroorganisms
FC
FS
Ec

31. Organisms in Feces vs Exposure Time
D-1 (Internal Specimen)
1
10
100
1,000
10,000
100,000
1,000,000
10,000,0007/20/997/27/99
8/3/998/10/998/17/998/24/998/31/99
9/7/99Date
LogofSurvivingMicroorganisms
FC
FS

32. Findings...
 Fecal Streptococci have a
tendency to survive somewhat
longer than do Fecal Coliform’s
and Escherichia coli.

33. Findings...
 Flora deep within a fecal
specimen survive longer,
decreasing at an average of one
order of magnitude per 3 or 4
weeks.

34. Findings...
 Fecal Microorganisms can
survive in the alpine
environment.
 Surface Flora Decrease
Significantly over time and
average one order of magnitude
per week.

35. Findings...
 Feces deposited on snow has a
tendency to act as a black body
and sink into the snow.
 Specimens never completely
disappeared... (unless covered
by new snow!)

36. S-2
1 August
2 Pieces Broken
Off

37. S-2
15 August
Specimen has
Broken into
3 Pieces

38. S-2
12 September
Specimen has
Broken into
> 12 Separate
Pieces

39. Part 2...
 The Smearing project began on
6 July 1999 when 4 smears
were established in a fell field at
8,200’

40. TK-1 Smearing Site Prep
6 July

41. 4 Flat Rocks
were first
weighed,
then
smeared
with a
“pancake/
veneer” of
fresh fecal
material.

42. Smears...
 Two “Thin” Smears: approximately
2-3 mm thick. TN-1 and TN-2.
 Two “Thick”Smears:
approximately 4-7 mm thick. TK-1
and TK-2.

43. TN-1 Twenty Minutes Post Smearing

44. TN-1 Twenty Minutes Post Smearing -
Close Up

45. TK-2, 20 July 1999. Note desiccation
and wasting (on left edge of smear)
Two Weeks of Exposure

46. TK-2
40 Days of
exposure
NOTE: Dried
Smear Mass
To the Bottom
Left of Rock

47. TK-2
54 Days of
Exposure
Hard to See
but Dried Smear
Mass has
Disappeared.

48. TN-1
31 Days of
Exposure
Rock appears
to have almost
been WASHED
clean!
Smear Flakes
visible below +
undigested corn.

49. Loss of Smear Material...
 Smear desiccation averaged
84.4% of their Mass
 Low loss = 77.6%
 High loss = 95.3%
 Exposure time was 56 days (8
weeks)

50. Weight Loss of Smears, 1999
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
6 July 1 August 15 August 12 September
Date
GramsofFeces
TN-1 Tn-2 TK-1 TK-2
68 Days Exposure Time
Weight Change Past This Date Seemed to
be More a Function of Rain/Snow

51. Fecal Organisms in Feces vs Exposure Time
TK-1 (Smear Specimen)
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
10000000
100000000
Jul-99 Aug-99 Sep-99
Date
LogofSurvivingMicroorganisms
FC
FS
Ec

52. Findings...
 Smears begin desiccating
immediately and virtually
disappear within 8 weeks of
exposure.

53. Findings...
 Soils surrounding the smears do
not become significantly
contaminated with bacteria
washed from the smears or
smear contaminated rocks.

54. Interpretation...
 Organisms succumb to the
environmental conditions prior
to the breakup and flaking off of
the fecal mass.

55. So What Are the Public
Health Impacts?

56. Public Health Impacts...
 Viruses probably do not survive
any longer than the bacteria.
 Protozoa may survive LONG
after bacteria.

57. Recommendations...
 Continue study to verify 1999
results.
 Add Temperate Rainforest
Component.
 Add Dry Climate Component
(Eastern Washington Site)
 Investigate the possibility of
including Protozoa.

58. 2000 Study

59. 2000 Study…
 2 Study Sites
 Mt. Rainier National Park @
Longmire, WA: 7 miles inside the
SW entrance to Mount Rainier
National Park.
 Wet, Humid, Shady, Heavily
Forested

60. Longmire Site
Location Map
Longmire
Area Rainfall = 60-140” year-1

61. Longmire Study Area Site Map

62. Longmire Site

63. Arid Site…
 Naches, WA: 10 miles on USFS
Road 1400 off HWY 12 (this truly
is 10 miles of bad road!)
 Hot, Dry, Sagebrush and
Ponderosa Pine. Open.

64. Naches Site
Location Map

65. X
X
Study Site
Location

66. Naches Site Location

67. 2000 Protocol Changes…
Feces smeared rocks were
placed in dog crates covered
with ¼” hardware cloth.

68. Rational…
I wanted to be certain that
the disappearance was not
due to coprophagous (feces
eating) animals.

69. 2000 Protocol Changes…
 Within each crate, two Thick
Smears and Two Thin Smears
were placed
 Samples for microbiological
analysis were only taken from 1
Thin and 1 Thick Smear at each
site during the study.

70. Rational…
 I wanted to be certain that
weight loss was due to natural
causes and not specimen
collection.

71. Placing the Smeared Rocks in the Dog Crate

72. Smears
Sampled:
 N-TN2
 N-TK1
 L-TN2
 L-TK1
Smears
Undisturbed
 N-TN1
 N-TK2
 L-TN1
 L-TK2
Microbiological
Examination
Smear Desiccation
Examination

73. Data Collection Dates
 Samples were set out on 3 June
2000.
 Biweekly weights and fecal samples
taken for analysis.
 Final microbiology samples taken on
8/9 September 2000: 14 weeks (97
days)
 Final data (weight) was taken on 6
October 2000: 18 Weeks (125 days)

74. Exposure Period…
This exposure period was
10 weeks longer than the
1999 Alpine Experiment.

75. Rocks at both sites were tare weighed

76. A fresh fecal smear was applied to each rock

77. N-TK2
L-TK1
Drying evident from the
visible cracking.
Drying less evident -
Smear infested with
insect larvae.
Naches Site
Longmire Site
Day 2

78. On 8 June, following 5 Days of Exposure
and a rainstorm. L-TK2

79. 07/02/2000
(4 weeks)
Naches Site
N-TN1
Longmire Site
L-TN1

80. 07/15/2000
(6 weeks)
Naches Site
N-TN2
Longmire Site
L-TN1

81. 09/08/2000
(12.5 Weeks)
Naches Site
N-TN1
Longmire Site
L-TK1
Lens Cover Problem!
Funky Mold Growth
following a rain.

82. White Stalks and Dots are Mold
Hyphae and Sporangia on L-TN1,
6 October 2000

83. 10/06/2000
(18 weeks)
Naches Site
N-TK1
Same (N-TK1)
Close-up

84. 10/06/2000
Longmire Site
L-TK1

85. Results…

86. Smear Desiccation…
 Naches
 N-TN2 lost
92.9% of its
weight.
 N-TK1 lost
97.3% of its
weight
 Longmire
 L-TN2 lost
94.4% of its
weight.
 L-TK1 lost
87.7% of its
weight

87. Fecal Weight Loss vs Time
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
6/3/20006/17/20007/1/20007/15/20007/29/20008/12/2000
8/26/20009/9/20009/23/2000
Sample Dates
WeightofFecalSmearin
Grams
N-TN-2 L-TN-2 N-TK-1 L-TK-1
Rain in Longmire

88. Smear appearances were
dramatically different!

89. Naches Appearance…
Dry
Sponge-like
Fibrous

90. Weight = 2.0 grams!

91. Longmire Appearance…
 Flat
 Non-fibrous

92. Longmire

93. Because the majority of the
rocks still supported some
remnants of the original
fecal smears, the
disappearance of the
smears in the 1999 Alpine
Study was probably aided
by Coprophagous animals.

94. Soil Contamination…
 Initial samples of soils from
both sites were free of fecal
bacteria contamination.

95. Soil Contamination…
 One type of fecal bacterium was
found beneath one Naches
smear, one time.
 30 Fecal Streptococci were
detected on 10 August.

96. Soil Contamination…
 Fecal bacteria were detected
beneath both Longmire smears
on 3 of 7 sample dates
following smearing.
 Numbers were highest on
17 June after 2 weeks.

97. Soil Contamination…
 Numbers decreased as the
study progressed.
 None were found after 27
August beneath L-TK1 or after
10 August beneath
L-TN2.

98. Soil Contamination…
Numbers fluctuated from
700’s to 30 to zero to 60 and
to zero again.

99. Fecal Coliforms Contaminating Soil Beneath Rocks
Smeared with Feces
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
6/3/2000
6/17/2000
7/1/2000
7/15/2000
7/29/2000
8/12/2000
8/26/2000
Sample Date
NumberofFecalColiformsper
GramofSoil
N-TN-2 N-TK-1 L-TN-2 L-TK-1
Red Lines = Naches
Black Lines = Longmire

100. Fecal Streptocci Contaminating Soils Beneath Rocks
Smeared with Feces
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
6/3/2000
6/17/2000
7/1/2000
7/15/2000
7/29/2000
8/12/2000
8/26/2000
Sample Date
NumberofFecalStreptococciper
GramofSoil
N-TN-2 N-TK-1 L-TN-2 L-TK-1
Red Lines = Naches
Black Lines = Longmire

101. Escherichia coli Contaminating
Soils Beneath Rocks Smeared with
Feces
0
50
100
150
200
6/3/01
6/17/01
7/1/01
7/15/01
7/29/01
8/12/01
8/26/01
Sample Date
FecalBacteriaper
gramofsoil
N-TN2 L-TN2 L-TK1
Red Lines = Naches
Black Lines = Longmire

102. Survival in Soils…
 E. coli does not survive well in
soils.
 FC survives more than E. coli
but less than FS.
 This has been demonstrated in
past studies.

103. Organism Survival inside
Fecal Smears

104. Naches vs Longmire
THIN SMEARS

105. 0
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
Initial 2-Jul 30-
Jul
27-
Aug
Sample Date
Fecal Bacteria Survival in L-TN1
FC FS Ec Pa
Fecal Bacteria Survival in N-TN1
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
6/3/20016/17/20017/1/20017/15/20017/29/20018/12/20018/26/2001
Sample Date
Bacteriapergram
FC FS Ec
Fecal Bacteria Survival
In Fecal Smears
L-TN1 vs N-TN1
Ps. Aeruginosa was
not detected even
initially so we gave up
looking for it.

106. Naches…
 Fecal bacteria succumbed quickly
and populations fell to low levels.
 FC were never again detected after
the initial smear.

107. Naches…
 FS detected through 8
September at 235 gram-1 (but
fluctuated from 45 to that
number)
 E.c detected one time following
initial smearing, on 17 July at
225 gram-1

108. Longmire…
Substantial survival
throughout the entire study.
At the end of the study there
were the following
populations …

109. FC: 384,180 gram- 1
FS: 706,050 gram-1
Ec: 436,090 gram-1

110. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
FC
EC
FC
Ec
0
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
Bacteria
per gram
Sample Date
Organism
Bacterial Survival in N-TN1 vs L-TN1
FC FS EC FC FS Ec

111. Naches vs Longmire
THICK SMEARS
Bacterial Content

112. Naches…
 FC varied during sampling from
0 to 311,000+
 FS levels fell much more slowly
but eventually fell to zero.
 Ec levels fell, rose and then fell
to zero.

113. Longmire…
 FC increased by a factor of 7X
initially. This may have been
due to an unequal level of FC’s
within each gram of fecal
material.

114. Longmire…
 FS levels fell rather consistently
but were still at nearly 1,500 g-1
before the smear remnant
disappeared.
 E.c. levels fell 90% in two weeks
then to zero for the remainder
of the study period.

115. 0
5000000
10000000
15000000
20000000
Initial 2-Jul 30-
Jul
27-
Aug
Sample Date
Fecal Bacteria Survival in L-TK2
FC FS Ec Pa
Fecal Bacteria Survival in N-TK2
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
6/3/2001
6/17/2001
7/1/2001
7/15/2001
7/29/2001
8/12/2001
8/26/2001
Sample Date
Bacteriapergram
FC FS Ec
Fecal Bacteria Survival
In Fecal Smears
L-TK2 vs N-TK2

116. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
FC
Ec
FC
Ec
0
5000000
10000000
15000000
Bacteria
per gram
Sample Date
Organism
Bacterial Survival in
N-TK2 vs L-TK2
FC FS Ec FC FS Ec

117. Overall Conclusions…
All smears lost between 88%
- 97% of their weight.
There were major differences
in the appearance and
“consistency” of the smear
remnants.

118. Overall Conclusions…
Organisms in the Naches
smears experienced a much
more rapid and more
complete die-off than the
Longmire smears.

119. Overall Conclusions…
Organism survival was
affected by Temperature,
Humidity and Solar
Radiation exposure.

120. Overall Conclusions…
 Fecal organisms contaminated the
soils beneath only one of the
Naches smears (FS) and then only
30 cfu’s.
 This was probably due to higher
heat, more exposure to solar
radiation, little or no rain, coarse,
sandy soils and to the initially high
rate of desiccation.

121. Overall Conclusions…
 Soils beneath both Longmire soils
became contaminated more quickly
and to higher levels.
 This was probably due to rainfall.
 Their survival in the soil for a
longer period of time is probably
due to more shade, lower
temperatures, increased humidity,
and the organic (humus) nature of
the soil.

122.  Rainfall was noted during the
first three days of smear
exposure at Longmire with
stained water running off
from the fecal smear.
 This probably increased the
fecal organism runoff.

123. Public Health
Impacts

124.  It was not the intent to test for
Viruses, Protozoa or
Helminthes.
 Since viruses can survive at
least as long as bacteria,
 and since Protozoa can
survive even longer…

125.  Smearing feces on rocks as a
method of “disposal” may,
under some environmental
conditions, have a tendency
to build up not only fecal
bacteria but probably viruses
and protozoa as well in the
“disposal” area.

126.  Bacteria could be spread to
surface water by rain or
spread by animals.
 This could potentially lead to
the spread of human
pathogens.

127.  Smearing would tend to
expose the feces and the
seeds within, to animals
which could then spread them
to areas as non-indigenous or
exotic species.
Another Consideration…

128.  Smearing seems to be a
deceptively simple method of
“disposal.”
 Much more study needs to be
conducted on how quickly
fecal organisms would build
up in an area where multiple
(100’s or 1000’s?) of people
would use the area frequently
during a season.

129. Smearing should only be
considered in either alpine
or very arid areas and
under very strictly
controlled circumstances.

130. Ideally, the use of plastic
bags to retrieve feces and
pack it out is a preferred
method from both a Public
Health and an Environmental
perspective.
My OPINION…

131. We still have a lot to learn
about how fecal organisms
behave in the environment.

132. There was also a third
project in 2000!
Since fecal masses deposited on
snow (whole) disappeared…
Would the same thing happen to
fecal smears on snow?

133.  This experiment consisted of
smearing feces on the Muir
Snowfield…
 and then sampling
surrounding snows and feces
until September
 Smearing took place on
29 July, 2000.

134. If you don’t want to look…
TURN AWAY!

135. We tried Smearing with a Snowball

136. It didn’t work too well
because the Feces kept
sticking to the snow and was
difficult to spread.

137. We tried smearing with a Plastic
Ziploc® Bag as a glove.

138.  Plastic Bags work better!
 We sampled snow immediately
following smearing.

141. 0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
Bacteria
per ml of
melted
snow
FC FS Ec Ps.a
Fecal Organism
Levels of Fecal Bacteria
in Stained Snow
FC
FS
Ec
Ps.a
66,000 FC
90,000 Ec

142. Two Weeks Later…
 Snow Samples 08/11/00
 No Detectable Fecal Bacteria in
samples of 10, 25, 50 ml of
melted snow!
 Following August 11, the
samples disappeared! (that’s just
2 weeks!)

143. Conclusions…
 We need to take micro samples
~hourly over a several day
period of time to determine the
length and extent of migration
of fecal organisms.

144. Conclusions…
 Fecal smears disappear more
quickly than fecal masses on
the snowfield.
 This disappearance and low
fecal contamination levels
may be due to the
environmental conditions,
 And/or coprophagus animals!

145. Conclusions…
 Smearing may be a better
method of “disposal” on snow
in the alpine environment than
simply dropping feces on snow
or burying it.

146. Special Thanks to
the Funders and
Supporters of this
Project!

147. 1995 Study Report

148. 1999 Study Report

149. 2000 Study Report
(Arid
Environment)

150. 2000 Study Report
(Temperate
Environment)