J& **,
I x4R-
EPA's BEACH Report:
Washington 2008 Swimming Season
July 2009
Introduction
The BEACH Act of 2000 requires that coastal and
Great Lakes states and territories report to EPA on
beach monitoring and notification data for their coastal
recreation waters. The BEACH Act defines coastal
recreation waters as the Great Lakes and coastal waters
(including coastal estuaries) that states, territories, and
authorized tribes officially recognize or designate for
swimming, bathing, surfing, or similar activities in the
water.
This fact sheet summarizes beach monitoring and
notification data submitted to EPA by the State of
Washington for the 2008 swimming season.
Between Memorial Day and Labor Day each year, the
Washington BEACH Program monitors fecal bacteria
at approximately 70 saltwater beaches. In 2008, this
number was reduced to 55 due to increased costs and
static funding. The Program is managed collaboratively
by the State Departments of Ecology and Health
and accomplished through the cooperative efforts of
local health jurisdictions, tribal nations, non-profit
organizations, and volunteers. There are more than 100
people involved in implementing Washington's BEACH
Program.
Bacteria levels at Washington's marine waters are
typically very low with 63% of samples showing
bacteria levels below the detection limit. Beaches that
exceed water quality standards are usually shallow
enclosed bays close to urban areas. The Washington
BEACH Program implements several strategies to
protect beachgoers from bacteria related illness and
improve water quality. In addition to monitoring and
notification, it identifies beaches with chronic problems
and assists local health jurisdictions in fixing those
problems. The Washington BEACH Program has
successfully conducted investigations of contamination
sources and worked with shoreline communities to
identify and correct bacteria problems. For instance, at
Freeland County Park in Island County high bacteria
levels prompted closing shellfish harvesting in March,
2006 and swimming in June, 2006. In March, 2007 the
Island County Commissioners established a Shellfish
Protection District and increased monitoring and
pollution source identification and remediation. A
public outreach effort included cleaning up septic
systems, pet waste, agricultural issues, business and
residential practices that contribute to pollution.
Although the shellfish closure remains in effect, the
beach was reopened to swimming September 10, 2008.
Figure 1. Washington coastal counties.
Table 1. Breakdown of monitored and
unmonitored coastal beaches
by county for 2008.
County
CLALLAM
GRAYS
HARBOR
ISLAND
JEFFERSON
KING
KIITSAP
MASON
PACIFIC
PIERCE
SAN JUAN
SKAGIT
SNOHOMISH
THURSTON
WHATCOM
TOTALS
Total
Beaches
94
71
113
122
90
181
71
59
137
231
66
42
39
50
1,366
Monitored
6
3
3
3
8
9
3
1
6
0
1
7
1
5
56
Not
Monitored
88
68
110
119
82
172
68
58
131
231
65
35
38
45
1,310
-------
2008 Summary Results
How many notification actions were reported
and how long were they?
When water quality standards are exceeded at a
particular beach, Washington's approach is to issue
a beach advisory that warns people to avoid contact
with the water. A total of 11 monitored beaches
had at least one advisory issued during the 2008
swimming season. Figure 2 presents a breakdown
of notification action durations. (This graph does not
include four beaches that are permanently posted
with advisories, two beaches posted for advisories
that occurred outside of the swim season and ten
actions at beaches that were not monitored.)
What percentage of days were beaches under a
notification action?
For Washington's 2008 swimming season, actions
were reported about 1 percent of the time (Figure 3).
How do 2008 results compare to previous years?
Table 2 compares 2008 notification action data with
monitored beach data from previous years.
What pollution sources possibly affect
investigated monitored beaches?
Figure 4 displays the percentage of Washington's
investigated monitored beaches possibly affected by
various pollution sources. In 2008, 33 percent of the
beaches were listed as having unidentified sources of
pollution.
For More Information
For general information about beaches:
www.epa.gov/beaches/
For information about beaches in Washington:
www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/eap/beach/
Figure 2: Beach notification actions by duration.
2 3-7 8-30
Duration of Actions (days)
>30
Figure 3: Beach days with
and without
notification
actions.
Beach days
with an action:
90
(2%)
Beach days
with no action
5,006
(98%)
Table 2. Beach notification actions, 2006-2008.
Number of monitored
beaches
Number of beaches
affected by notification
actions
Percentage of beaches
affected by notification
actions
Percentage of beach
days affected by
notification actions
2006
80
20
25%
4%
2007
65
12%
3%
2008
56
11
20%
2%
Note: A single beach may
have multiple sources.
Figure 4: Percent of investigated monitored beaches affected
by possible pollution sources (12 beaches).
Percent of beaches
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Investigated / no sources found
Non-storm related runoff
Storm-related runoff
Agricultural runoff
Boat discharge
Cone, animal feeding operation
Combined sewer overflow
Sanitary sewer overflow
Publicly-owned treatment works
Sewer line leak or break
Septic system leakage
Wildlife
Other (identified) source(s)
Unidentified source(s)
------- |