WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2010 AT 1:48 P.M. JOHN GIBBINS Beach water quality testing in San Diego County and the rest of California is jeopardized by the lack of a long-term funding source. California’s signature clean-beach initiative — testing for bacteria at hundreds of sites statewide — was left out of the recently passed budget, but a state agency appears to have found nearly $1 million to keep the program afloat for another year. On Nov. 2, the State Water Resources Control Board is expected to approve spending $984,000 from voter-approved environmental funding initiatives to pay for the tests in 2011. The board approved a similar measure in 2008. The new move is likely to come with a directive that various parties involved in ocean monitoring better coordinate their efforts to reduce redundancy and the need for outside funding. Beyond that, the future of beach testing in California remains murky, as it has been since Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger eliminated spending for the program during budget cuts in 2008. Ocean advocates welcomed the possible injection of grant money from Propositions 13 and 50 but said it’s not enough. The funds would come from projects that didn’t use their allotment. “This does not represent a sustainable, long-term source of funding,” said Rick Wilson, coastal management coordinator for the Surfrider Foundation’s national office in San Clemente. “It is imperative that such a funding source be identified for the protection of beachgoers in the future.” In 1997, Assembly Bill 411 mandated that all beaches with storm drains that discharge during dry weather and that are visited by more than 50,000 people a year be monitored at least weekly by local health officials from April 1 to Oct. 31. California later ordered the posting of warning signs at beaches that exceed state standards for bacterial indicators. The program is among the most comprehensive in the nation and is widely credited with prompting improvements at polluted beaches. If it disappears, conservationists such as Wilson fear contamination levels will creep back up to pre-1997 levels. For months, ecology groups, health officials, elected leaders and others have been trying to cobble together a steady stream of money to keep the tests running. Historically, San Diego County received about $300,000 for its peak-season testing at dozens of sites. “San Diego County is in some ways the most perilous situation because it gets the biggest amount from the state,” Wilson said. San Diego County Supervisor Greg Cox has directed his staff to investigate financing sources, including a possible federal grant, but said this week that nothing is imminent. “I view this as a public safety issue and something that we ought to be doing for the public, especially in San Diego” where the economy relies on beach tourism, Cox said. So why not use county money to pay for the program? “We are dealing with the same issues everybody else is” with regard to budget cuts, Cox said. Mike Lee: (619)293-2034; mike.lee@uniontrib.com. Follow on Twitter @sdenviNearly $1 million found for beach water tests in 2011
Funds still must be approved by state water officials.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Beach Monitoring in CA Survives Budget Cuts for 1 More Year
Posted by
Anonymous
at
8:13 AM
0
comments
Labels: Beach monitoring, Budget
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Beach monitoring in CA suffers from budget cuts: Part 2
Beach quality testing in California has plummeted in recent years, increasing surfers' risk of unknowingly exposing themselves to contaminated water, according to a report by the Los Angeles Times. With no clear state funding for testing after this year, advocacy groups like Surfrider Foundation and Santa Barbara Channelkeeper are stepping up to fill the gap. Surfrider Foundation began testing beaches in the early '90s, due to the lack of public information on water quality, but bowed out to county agencies in 1999, after a California law required official publicized beach monitoring throughout the state. California led the country in beach quality monitoring, paving the way for the Federal Beach Act, which established water-testing requirements around the nation. It's a decade later, and water testing in California has fallen to an all-time low since the policy change. In 2008, the state cut the project's $1 million budget, leaving health agencies scrambling to continue testing with emergency bond funds, which are expected to run out by the end of the year. By law, counties are not required to continue the beach monitoring without proper funding, prompting Surfrider to conduct its own testing. "Some of the counties will basically take the winter off," says Surfrider's Coastal Management Coordinator, Rick Wilson. The counties are prioritizing and assume there will be fewer beach-goers during the colder months, he says. Many Surfrider chapters are using volunteers to raise funds for lab equipment, collect samples, and publicize test results on the web. "We're not a state certified lab, so we're not necessarily saying to close the beach because of our results," says Wilson. "But it's good general information to know whether the bacteria counts are high or low." Water with high levels of bacteria, sourced from sewage systems, leaking septic tanks or animal waste, makes surfers vulnerable to illness, rashes and infections. And after the 2008 winter budget cuts, Santa Barbara Channelkeeper took over monitoring several county beaches, posting the contamination levels from spots like Rincon and El Capitan State Beach. It's common for locals to complain of such ailments after surfing certain spots, says Ben Pitterle, the Watershed Group's Program Director. But coupled with the best swells of the season, even the worst contamination reports can be ignored. Pitterle admits that deciding whether or not to jump in questionable water leads to an unfair give and take, in which good surf usually wins. "If the surf's not that good and it's dirty, I'll stay out," he says. "I think most surfers know what they're getting into-if the surf's good enough, they're probably going to go for it anyways." Paul Jenkin, Environmental Coordinator for Ventura County's Surfrider Chapter, suffers from frequent ear infections and once had mononucleosis, allegedly caused by poor water quality. The Ventura Surfrider chapter partners with Pitterle's group to test the often-neglected fresh water streams feeding to the central coastline. He believes more people should report illness after surfing dirty water, even when the correlation is difficult to confirm. "I think a lot of surfers think, 'Oh yeah bummer I got sick,' and just kind of move on with things. But if nobody reports then nobody knows. We need to demonstrate that there really is a health risk," he says. Surfers shouldn't ignore useful albeit bothersome guidelines, like showering post-session and staying out of the water for 72 hours after rainfall. When deciding whether to go to beaches that are near heavy development, creek mouths, or storm drains, Wilson suggests choosing spots with the most natural surroundings. "Where [polluted] water tends to collect, then spill out to the ocean, is typically worse than a spot half a mile away," says Wilson. California coast residents testing the neglected beaches are hoping for county programs to resume this winter. "We're definitely discouraged that the funding for this kind of important testing is being cut," says Pitterle. "We hope as things turn around, and as the economy improves, it will again become a priority." http://www.surfermag.com/features/onlineexclusives/californias_contaminated_coastline_surfrider_foundation_beach_water_testing/
State's Budget Cuts Put Surfers at Risk
By Chelsea Marcum
September 29, 2010
Posted by
Anonymous
at
9:12 AM
0
comments
Labels: Beach monitoring, Budget, swimming advisories
Friday, September 3, 2010
Beach monitoring in CA suffers from budget cuts
Health testing way down at California beaches
The monitoring is at its lowest level since becoming law more than a decade ago, putting swimmers, surfers and divers at greater risk of exposure to contaminated water, a Times investigation shows.
August 30, 2010|By Tony Barboza, Los Angeles Times
Irfan Khan, Los Angeles TimesHealth testing of California's beaches has slumped to its lowest level since ocean monitoring became law more than a decade ago, putting swimmers, surfers and divers at greater risk of exposure to contaminated water, a Times investigation has found.
Beaches from San Diego to the Bay Area are being tested less often and in fewer locations; some are going untested for months at a time. Statewide, the number of annual tests for bacteria has dropped by nearly half since 2005, according to a Times analysis of state records.
Beach closures and advisories have also fallen dramatically — in part because there's less pollution, but also because health officials aren't detecting the dirty water that remains.
At calm, sheltered Baby Beach in Dana Point, which attracts parents with young children but also traps contaminated runoff, health officials did not test for five months earlier this year.
In Long Beach, home to some of the most polluted ocean water in the state, 40% of beach sites are no longer being tested, city officials said. State records show that testing at Cabrillo Beach in San Pedro is down 80% and 65% in Santa Monica. At San Onofre State Beach at the northern edge of San Diego County, water at the legendary Trestles surf break was tested only four times last year, down from nearly 70 times in 2005.
The culprit is a familiar one: state and county budget cuts. In 2008, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed the $1 million the state had provided each year to test hundreds of beaches for bacteria. Since then, emergency bond funds and stimulus dollars have been tapped to keep the testing program afloat, but the money is expected to evaporate by year's end.
Overall, water quality at the region's beaches is almost certainly better than it was in the past, experts say. Tens of millions of dollars have been spent to divert and treat runoff and wastewater before it washes into the ocean. Drought conditions have also reduced the amount of runoff reaching the ocean.
Nonetheless, clean-water advocates say the cutbacks have put people at risk. Those who swim in contaminated water are exposed to gastrointestinal viruses and to pathogens that can cause skin rashes and ear, eye and staph infections. Swimmers are most likely to get sick in poor-circulating water near river mouths and sewer outfalls, especially after rain.
"Water quality absolutely has gotten better during the summer months," said Mark Gold, president of Heal the Bay. "But the reality is that less frequent monitoring means there's a much greater chance of someone swimming or surfing in polluted water unknowingly."
Tourism officials have also expressed concern. They say the cost to monitor beaches is inconsequential compared with the estimated $12 billion in tourist-related revenue California beach towns generate each year.
"California's coastline is one of our biggest assets as a travel destination," said Kathryn Burnside, a spokeswoman for the California Travel and Tourism Commission. "What makes sense from a health perspective certainly makes sense for the tourism industry."
Health and wastewater agencies responsible for beach testing defend the scaled-back monitoring as adequate. Some officials said the amount of testing has been underreported, while others acknowledged severe cutbacks.
Schwarzenegger's office said the state has continued funding beach water monitoring at a 90% level despite budget difficulties.
"It is not immediately clear why the number of tests taken by counties have declined this much," spokeswoman Rachel Arrezola said in a written statement. She said the Department of Public Health and the State Water Board are investigating the reason for the declines while they search for a permanent funding source for future testing.
Los Angeles County health officials said their own testing has remained constant and disputed the state's records for the county's coastline.
"We continue to do the tests weekly, and we're not doing less sampling because we don't have money," said Alfonso Medina, director of the county's Environmental Protection Bureau. However, other agencies that test some of the county's beaches may have cut back.
Public health officials say they are unable to gauge if reduced testing has caused more swimmers to get sick. Cases are rarely reported because they mimic ailments such as food poisoning or stomach flu.
The number of beaches in California closed by health officials has fallen 74% since 2005, The Times found. Postings, which alert swimmers to contaminated water, dropped 44%. State and local officials do not know how much of that decline is attributable to cleaner water and how much to less testing. Many beachgoers, however, assume that the lack of signs means the water is clean.
"If there isn't a sign posted, I kind of assume it's safe," said Susan Thomas, who takes her 16-month-old daughter, MaKenzie, to the beach every other weekend. "We're obviously taking a risk going into the water anywhere along this coast, but when she swims, she goes under."
The beach where Thomas spoke, Baby Beach in Dana Point, was busy on a balmy afternoon earlier this month. Dozens of children and their parents splashed in a shallow, roped-off swimming area as a lifeguard watched from a tower nearby.
Historically, the beach has been one of the region's dirtiest, sliding by with C's and D's on Heal the Bay's annual beach report card. And yet health monitoring at Baby Beach and 38 other beaches in Orange County — including Little Corona in Newport Beach and Main Beach in Laguna — shut down for five months during the winter for lack of funds.
California's pioneering 1999 law requires health officials to test at least once a week during the long summer beach season. If a beach fails, lifeguards post signs alerting swimmers to the risk. Congress used the law as its national model, and many Southern California beaches expanded to year-round, almost daily testing earlier this decade.
But the California law has a loophole: Testing isn't required if the program is not fully funded. Without money from Sacramento, health agencies can cut testing or choose not to report results without violating the law, something state officials suspect is contributing to the declining numbers.
In Ventura County, the loss of state funds meant that monitoring of its 42-mile coastline was halted for eight months in November 2008.
"Once the money went away, there was no mandate to sample, so we suspended sampling," said program coordinator Richard Hauge.
In some coastal areas, nonprofits are taking up the slack as government agencies cut back.
When Santa Barbara County reduced funding for year-round beach testing two years ago, the nonprofit Santa Barbara Channelkeeper raised money to pay interns to collect the water samples at 16 beaches through the winter, when the bigger waves draw more surfers.
Other places, such as Orange County, are collaborating more with sanitation districts, which are required to test ocean water as part of their license to discharge wastewater from sewage treatment plants.
And in San Diego County, which had to drop its monitoring program for half a year last winter, health officials have begun more frequent testing at pollution-prone coastlines, such as Torrey Pines State Beach.
Even with those assists, however, there is less information available for surfers and swimmers like Barry Gardner, a ninth-grade health teacher from Yorba Linda who takes half a dozen surf camping trips a year.
He's wary of spending too much time in dirty ocean water and avoids a section of Doheny State Beach known as "Dead Bird Cove" because of its supposed toxicity. But for the most part, he prefers to push his luck.
"If the surf is good, I'm going to go in the water," he said. "But if you don't know what's in it, it's tough."
tony.barboza@latimes.com
Times staff writer Doug Smith and data analyst Sandra Poindexter contributed to this report.
Posted by
Anonymous
at
10:08 AM
0
comments
Labels: Beach monitoring, Budget, public health, Southern California, swimming advisories