| 
|
By
Elizabeth Cutright
 |
| Elizabeth Cutright |
Round Up the Usual Suspects
In 1989, when E. coli was discovered in a creek near Bolinas, CA, the town’s septic system was immediately targeted as the source of this pollution—before any tests had been done to determine whether the bacteria had a human source or if was the result of wildlife or livestock waste. It was assumed that the area’s 300 septic systems had simultaneously failed, and a call went out for blanket upgrade of each and every system. The citizens of Bolinas were able to successfully defeat this costly “quick-fix,” but the rush to judgment by city officials illustrates that septic systems are still the default “bad guy” when it comes to source-point water pollution in rural areas and small towns.
Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. In 2001, a University of Washington DNA study found that, contrary to popular belief, a leak in the liner underneath the Tajiguas landfill in Santa Barbara, CA, was not the source of fecal contamination at the local Arroyo Quemada Beach. The real culprit: the guano generated by thousands of seagulls loitering near the landfill. The inexpensive fix? A falconer to scare off the seagulls.
A similar solution may be all that’s needed farther down the coast as well. In Santa Barbara, residents can put their fears of widespread sewer contamination to rest, thanks to a two-year study partially funded by Heal the Ocean and headed by US Geological Survey hydrologist John Izbicki. According to the preliminary results of that study, released on June 18, 2007, wastewater leaks from nearby sewer lines are not responsible for the high fecal bacteria levels recorded in the West Beach area of the city. In fact, the data indicate that sewer leaks in that area are confined to the immediate location of the sewer pipe and do not migrate down to the shoreline. Although the study indicates that the fecal bacteria contamination of local groundwater, creek water, and “splash zone” (ankle-deep) water is the result of a variety of factors, including stormwater runoff from a nearby creek, a significant contributor remains those same unrepentant seagulls.
And it’s not just a West Coast problem. In 1996, septic system failure was blamed for the appearance of E. coli on Virginia’s east coast. Once a local shellfish farm shut down and it was determined that there were no local septic systems, the focus shifted to local wildlife. After 180 raccoons were trapped and removed from the area, bacteria levels in the tidal creeks dropped and the shellfish farm was able to resume operations. In September 2006, scientists running water quality tests on the Potomac and Anacostia rivers discovered that while humans could be blamed for approximately 24% of the pollution found in those rivers, the remaining 76% came from “wildlife dung” and livestock waste.
So why the rush to judgment? Well, in addition to negative public perception, there is also lots of money to be made in sewer and septic upgrades. In fact, a bill currently making its way through the California legislature (AB 885) includes statewide septic maintenance requirements that could end up costing homeowners as much as $30 billion in mandatory upgrades. We should all be worried about failing infrastructure and the big price tag associated with all the repairs and upgrades needed throughout the country, but, by the same token, we must also be conscientious about pricing people out of the market.
How do we reconcile the need to protect our water sources with the budgetary restraints of homeowners and small, rural communities? As the above examples demonstrate, the first step is to determine if the problem really is a failing septic system. In many cases, the old tanks are doing just fine, and only a small adjustment is needed. There may be instances when an upgrade or replacement cannot be avoided. In those cases, instead of immediately aiming for the complex and expensive alternative, all available small-scale, economical solutions should be explored and exhausted.
Finally, we must avoid at all costs no-win situations like the one being faced by residents of Los Osos, CA—the poster child for dysfunctional residential septic system planning. It appears there is no end in sight for this fight that has stretched over two decades, impacted land values, and pitted neighbor against neighbor. So far, this “wastewater nightmare” has cost the community over $150 million. Homeowners are now looking at $300 to $400 monthly sewer payments even while community members allege that the current project costs $50 million more than other cheaper, and more environmentally sound, alternatives. One look at the situation in Los Osos should make us all realize that, when it comes to septic system maintenance and development, there has got to be a better way.
OW - March/April 2008 |
