[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: BEACHNET==> Mercury as a Pathogen Indicator.

I wrote up a summary of the Beach Protection Act for internal use here at the Districts.  I agree that is doesn't fit with the Act.  Here is my summary and take on the amendment:

Section 13 – Monitoring Protocol for Mercury.
Requires the Administrator to: (1) review and update existing monitoring protocols as necessary for mercury affecting coastal recreation waters of the Great Lakes; and (2) update recommendations for testing including the presence of mercury in the Great Lakes sediment and fish tissue.  This provision provides funding for the effort and prohibits delay in publishing new or revised water quality criteria.

The use of mercury as a pathogen indicator and inclusion of this amendment in the BEACH Act of 2008 is highly inappropriate. The relationship between recreational water quality and public health risks to the illness acquired by swimming and mercury exposure are not established.  There is no evidence that mercury and pathogens occur at the same frequencies or that mercury is an indicator for pathogen occurrence.  The primary issue of mercury occurrence is air deposition, methylmercury bioaccumulation through the food chain, and the health effects of mercury consumption through fish tissues.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-beachnet@great-lakes.net
[mailto:owner-beachnet@great-lakes.net]On Behalf Of Mark Gold
Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 9:04 AM
To: rosejo@msu.edu; lwhite@kci.com; beachnet@great-lakes.net
Cc: DBARKER@HRSD.COM
Subject: Re: BEACHNET==> Mercury as a Pathogen Indicator.


Agreed. The closest linkage is nitrogen from emissions, but nothing on pathogens.

As for other chemical markers like coprostanol, caffeine or optical brighteners, they are used for source tracking only.

----- Original Message -----
From: owner-beachnet@great-lakes.net <owner-beachnet@great-lakes.net>
To: lwhite <lwhite@kci.com>; beachnet@great-lakes.net <beachnet@great-lakes.net>
Cc: 'Barker, Danny' <DBARKER@HRSD.COM>
Sent: Sat May 10 08:45:58 2008
Subject: Re: BEACHNET==> Mercury as a Pathogen Indicator.

Chemicals have never been able to serve as a pathogen indicator.   I know of no data which would correlate mercury to other microbial pollutants of concern.  I do not even think that most of the sources are correlated (industrial and atmospheric).
Do you know anything more about it?

Joan
Joan B. Rose, PhD
Homer Nowlin Chair in Water Research
Michigan State University
13 Natural Resources
E. Lansing MI 48824
517-432-4412 (ph)
517-432-1699 (fax)
rosejo@msu.edu


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: lwhite <mailto:lwhite@kci.com>
        To: beachnet@great-lakes.net
        Cc: 'Barker, Danny' <mailto:DBARKER@HRSD.COM>
        Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 10:06 AM
        Subject: BEACHNET==> Mercury as a Pathogen Indicator.


        Representative Mark Kirk offered an amendment to the Beach Protection Act of 2008 “to treat Mercury as a Pathogen Indicator”.  I’m looking for what the main point of this amendment is.  Is it that mercury should be consider a contaminant or an indicator of something else?



        Lewis R. White, P. E.

        Senior Associate

        KCI Technologies, Inc

        4605 Pembroke Lake Circle, Suite 101

        Virginia Beach, VA



        Phone 757-671-9032   Fax 757-671-9071



mwȲo+xjjґs
yjG鹻&~+陨j敩w+i۲ryr)w*ʋjˍ)jzn
jّzߊriz
igzج-y-ߢ*'5p!0Vz޵:.˛mkabٚ[h&
jZ'z"ay&ݺ{.n+y!b^nr�Ơx*^칸rbz*tm 歕wXy!m朆ww