No Day at the Beach
Excessive stormwater runoff
leads to poor water quality
B
efore you let Junior splash his brand new boogie board into that cool ocean, consider the fact that Malibu’s Surfrider County Beach was one of California’s dirtiest beaches in 2004, with 137 days of closures or posted advisories.
This yucky statistic, according to the National Resources Defense Council’s (http://www.nrdc.org) June 2005 document, "Testing the Waters: A Guide to Water Quality at Vacation Beaches," is but a fraction of the pollution problem faced by those who enjoy the sun, surf and sand of Southern California beaches.
While beach closing and health advisory days decreased statewide in 2004, Los Angeles County had its highest number of closure and health advisory days in five years.
Troubled Waters
In "Testing the Waters" (http://www.nrdc.org/water/oceans/ttw/titinx.asp), the NRDC explains that California authorities have required beachwater monitoring since 1999, following the approval of AB 411 (the Right to Know Bill) in October 1997.
Even though samples are tested for bacterial organisms, the NRDC cites a 1999 study conducted by the University of California, Irvine, which says that beaches should also regularly be tested for viruses, another potential danger to beachgoers.
Currently, all that is required are tests for three indicators: fecal coliform, total coliform, and enterococcus, with weekly monitoring of pollution levels occurring from April to October at California beaches with more than 50,000 annual visitors, or beaches located in areas adjacent to storm drains that flow during the summer.
Presumably, the reason for the latter stipulation is that one of the major sources of this type of pollution is stormwater runoff. The Leaf-let has addressed this issue for several years. In the 1999 article about construction site pollution ("Construction Site Pollution Federal Priority," http://www.ssseeds.com/leaf-let/constructionsitepollution.htm), we reported on the combined efforts of the Environmental Protection Agency, the State Water Resources Control Board, and nine regional water quality control boards to step up efforts to enforce compliance with stormwater pollution laws.
Still, some groups, such as the Building Industry Association (BIA) of San Diego, continue to fight regulations they consider unfair, as highlighted in the April 2005 Leaf-let article, "Building Industry Forced to Take Out the Trash" (http://www.ssseeds.com/leaf-let/buildingindustry.htm). Interestingly, San Diego was number three on the NRDC list of beach closures, following Los Angeles and Orange counties. Still, San Diego’s beach closures decreased 47 percent in 2004, possibly due to the tougher stormwater laws opposed by the BIA. But San Diego isn’t the only city that has faced opposition to stormwater issues.
They Fought the Law and the Law Won
With the passage of Proposition O in November 2004, voters in the city of Los Angeles committed $500 million to clean up Los Angeles’s stormwater runoff, which, says the NRDC, is "contaminated with bacteria, pesticides, oil, grease, and trash, and is the number one source of beach pollution."
Despite its residents’ apparent eagerness to clean up L.A., 44 cities within Los Angeles County filed five lawsuits opposing new runoff regulations. These lawsuits were dismissed by a Los Angeles Superior Court judge, but most are under appeal.
Lawyers for the suing cities claim—as the Building Industry of San Diego did in a similar lawsuit—that it will be too arduous and expensive to meet the latest stormwater compliance laws.
But is it cheaper to challenge revised regulations rather than to adhere to them? According to an article by Los Angeles Times staff writer Sara Lin, some of the cities have already spent $1.3 million on four lawsuits opposing a 2001 plan implemented by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board.
The plan requires government agencies and builders to make sure water is not polluted before it enters storm drains and heads for the ocean—the same ocean that Los Angeles-area beach visitors were unable to enjoy last year because of elevated bacteria levels.
Instead of spending enormous sums of money on legal fees, builders could be working with regulators to keep Los Angeles clean.
Pollution Solution
In 2002, in the Leaf-let article "Nipping Erosion in the Bud: An ounce of prevention less costly than a pound of cure (http://www.ssseeds.com/leaf-let/niperosioninthebud.htm)," we said, "Erosion control measures are increasingly necessary given the fact that housing developments are now cutting into hillsides—often the only open space left to build homes. Along with these sloping properties comes increased stormwater runoff, which heads straight for sewers, eventually polluting the ocean. There are, however, ways to successfully deal with this possibility."
At S&S Seeds, we firmly believe it’s our duty to help protect our oceans by providing builders, turf managers, landscape architects and other industry professionals with products suitable for stormwater compliance.
This includes a selection of erosion control blankets, bonded fiber matrices, soil binders, mulches, compost, fertilizers and microbial inoculants, as well as our reclamation and erosion control seed mixes.
For more information about our erosion control products, call us at (805) 684-0436 or visit our Web site, http://www.ssseeds.com. S&S Seeds will work with you to keep Los Angeles—and its beaches—beautiful.
Basic Native
Erosion Control Mix
The best choice for rapid growth!
Specially formulated annual Native California mix of Cucamonga Brome, Tomcat Clover, and Small Fescue
- Seed: 36 lbs. per acre
- Height: 30-36 inches
- Emergence: 10-15 days
- Establishment: 45 days to 90% cover after emergence
(805) 684-0436
|