Between April and October local health officials are required to test beach water quality at least weekly. They must test not only for coliform but also for fecal coliform and enterococcus bacteria. Advisory notices must be posted if test results exceed standards. Previously, each county determined its own test frequency and its own advisory notice and posting standards.

The new program will increase the frequency of testing at some beaches as well as the number of sites tested. It will provide more frequent and improved information about beach water pollution. The posting requirement is likely to lead to more beach advisories but fewer beach closures: the new legislation allows, but does not require, that beaches be closed when sewage has been spilled, and it does not require closure when bacterial standards are exceeded. Previously, local health authorities used their own discretion in deciding when to close beaches.

In 1996, a ground-breaking epidemiological study was undertaken on Santa Monica Bay by the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project, coauthored by Mark Gold of Heal the Bay. It found an increased incidence of a variety of ailments, including colds and coughs, ear infections, sore throats, fever, chills, and gastrointestinal disorders, in people who had water contact near beach areas affected by polluted runoff.

Another study, conducted in 1998 by the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, identified human enteric virus material in three of the four water samples that exceeded state recreational water contact standards for fecal coliform bacteria. No conclusive correlation has been established, however, between the presence of bacterial contamination and human viruses.

Citizens have called on government officials to allocate more staff and financial resources to identify specific sources of water pollution. In recent years a promising new use of DNA “typing” has helped to do this. When bacterial pollution was found in Rincon Creek, in Santa Barbara County, DNA testing showed that part of it came from human sources. In San Diego County, Donna Frye and others persuaded the County to use DNA tests to identify sources of pollution at Tourmaline Beach and three other beaches.

An obvious question arises: What else is in the water? Environmental groups have long battled state and federal governments over toxic pollutants found in California’s rivers, bays, and nearshore waters. Such pollutants continue to flow down many of California’s watersheds.
Chris Evans of Surfrider argues that beach water quality testing should be expanded beyond its current focus on bacterial contamination. Justin Malan, representing the local Environmental Health Directors in California, adds: “We need to get a handle on viral contamination by ensuring closer cooperation between state and local health agencies and the regional water quality control boards.”

Steve Weisberg, of the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, believes that “more coordinated, integrated, and targeted monitoring is needed.”

Return to the DANGEROUS WATERS story.