narragansett bay - water quality conditions …nbep.org/.../water_quality_for_recreation.docx ·...

WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS FOR RECREATIONDraft – April 2017

1. OVERVIEW

Water quality conditions for recreational use, such as swimming and boating, is a public health indicator focused on the risks of fecal pathogen contamination. In assessments of water quality conditions, state environmental agencies designate waterbodies as fully supporting recreational use or as impaired by one or multiple parameters considered harmful to humans when in contact with these waterbodies. This indicator measures the total extent of state-assessed waterbodies that are (1) fully supporting of recreational uses such as boating and swimming, (2) impacted by pathogen pollutants, or (3) unknown (i.e., not assessed for recreational use).

In the Narragansett Bay watershed, bacterial pollution is often present due to stormwater runoff and wastewater treatment systems and can be magnified by increased impervious cover and precipitation. Most of the estuarine waters of Narragansett Bay (85 percent) were classified as acceptable for recreational use. More freshwater streams were impacted by pathogens (36 percent) than were acceptable for recreational use (20 percent). The Pawtuxet River basin supports the greatest extent of acceptable fresh waters and the least relative extent of waters impacted by harmful bacteria. Over 40 percent of all freshwater bodies in the Narragansett Bay watershed were not assessed for water quality relating to recreational use, most notably in the Taunton River basin, where 60 percent of fresh waters remained unassessed.

2. INTRODUCTION

Streams, rivers, lakes, ponds in the Narragansett Bay watershed and the estuarine waters of the Bay itself support recreational activities such as fishing, shellfishing, swimming, and boating, providing significant economic and cultural value to the region. Fecal coliforms, Escherichia coli, and Enterococci are considered primary indicators for the presence of human pathogens in waters. Exposure to harmful microorganisms through recreation such as swimming and boating can cause health impacts such as gastroenteritis and sore throats, or even meningitis or encephalitis (Cabelli 1983 and 1989, USEPA 1986, Haile 1996, Pruss 1998). Fecal pathogens are implicated as the leading cause of water quality impairment in the country (USEPA 2016).

1

Various watershed factors have been linked with elevated pathogens in water bodies, such as failing septic systems, storm runoff, and discharges from wastewater treatment plants and combined sewer overflows. Impervious cover facilitates the transport of pathogens in runoff to receiving waters during precipitation events and has been positively correlated to bacterial counts in streams and estuaries (Sanger et al. 2015, Holland et al. 2004, Didonato et al. 2009, Crim et al. 2012). Dolah et al. (2007) found that pathogen loading in downstream estuarine waters was positively related to urban and suburban land cover and negatively related to natural land cover categories across 29 watersheds in South Carolina. Similar positive relationships between land cover and pathogen concentrations have been reported for streams and rivers (Didonato et al. 2009, Crim et al. 2012). In addition, Haack et al. (2013) found that both urban land cover and impervious cover related to exceedances of pathogen indicator standards at Great Lakes beaches.

In pre-colonial times and prior to industrialization, lower population densities around Narragansett Bay resulted in lower anthropogenic pathogen input. This changed when industrialization brought a three-fold increase in the watershed’s population, primarily along coastal areas of the upper Bay (see “Population” chapter). As a consequence, wastewater became the major source of pollution across Narragansett Bay. Even as sewered areas began to increase in the early 1900s, pipes funneled untreated sewage directly into Bay waters (Schumann 2015), discharging high human pathogen loads from household waste, in addition to industrial waste (see “Wastewater Infrastructure” chapter). Contamination of the Bay’s waters with pathogens resulted in dramatic declines of the shellfishing industry (Schumann 2015; see “Shellfishing Areas” chapter). In the mid-1900s, inadequately treated sewage and raw sewage continued to be the main source of pollution in the upper Narragansett Bay (Shea 1946).

Today, wastewater from septic systems (and cesspools) has been linked to water quality impairments, as wastewater treatment plants have been upgraded significantly, resulting in reduced pathogen loadings. Individual septic systems can contribute to fecal pollution of ground and surface waters if the systems are not properly designed, sited, and maintained (Schneeberger et al. 2015, Habteselassie et al. 2011, Humphrey et al. 2011). Sowah et al. (2014, 2017) found that high septic system density and low average distance of septic to streams were significant factors driving fecal pollution in suburban watersheds of Georgia.

Other physical stressors relating to urbanization interact with environmental factors such as temperature, precipitation, and natural

2

hazard regimes. Climate change will likely increase the influence of these stressors on recreational water quality. Heavy precipitation and flooding associated with more frequent and intense storms may amplify pathogen transport to receiving waters. Moreover, increasing water temperatures will likely create conditions that accelerate pathogenic bacterial growth. Analyzing the extent and distribution of waters within the Narragansett Bay watershed that are impacted by pathogens, limiting recreational use, informs an understanding of public health risks, as well as long-term efforts to improve water quality. 3. METHODS

Measurement of pathogens, in conjunction with other factors, can inform state management decisions to close beaches to swimming and to limit other uses such as shellfish harvesting and consumption. In this assessment, the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program used data from water quality assessments for both primary and secondary contact. Primary contact refers to recreational activities where humans have direct contact with the water, such as swimming. Secondary contact refers to recreational activities occurring on the water where there is indirect contact, such as canoeing or kayaking.

In accordance with the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), Rhode Island and Massachusetts have identified and designated waters according to specific uses and periodically publish these results in reports submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), known as Integrated Reports (Table 1; MADEP 2015, RIDEM 2015).

Table 1. List of all designated uses assessed by Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Bolded uses are the focus of this report.

Massachusetts1 Rhode Island2

Primary Contact Recreation Primary Contact RecreationSecondary Contact Recreation Secondary Contact Recreation

Fish, Other Aquatic Life and Wildlife Fish and Wildlife Habitat (Aquatic Life Use)

Fish Consumption Fish ConsumptionShellfish Harvesting Shellfish ConsumptionPublic Water Supply Drinking Water Supply

— Shellfish Controlled Relay and Depuration

Aesthetic —1 Uses are from the 2014 integrated list (IL) report (MassDEP 2015).2 Uses are from the 2014 integrated list (IL) report (RIDEM 2015).

3

Waterbodies are designated as “fully supporting” or “not supporting” designated uses based on state water quality standards. Waterbodies designated as “not supporting” may be added to the List of Impaired Waters (CWA Section 303(d)) and prioritized for development of restoration plans known as Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) (RIDEM 2016). If data are not available to conduct an assessment, the use is considered “not assessed.” The states’ reports reflect assessments derived from data generated in multiple years (typically within a time frame of five years), and not all waters are monitored within the same year. Rhode Island automatically classifies water bodies as “not supporting” for secondary contact if that waterbody is classified as such for primary contact recreational use. Conversely, Massachusetts assesses these designated uses individually.

In coordination with Rhode Island and Massachusetts state agencies, the Estuary Program developed the following classification scheme for analyzing water quality conditions for recreation:

Acceptable for Recreational Use: Waters that fully support recreational use for swimming and boating. This is equivalent to a “fully supporting” determination by the states.

Impacted by Pathogens: Waters that are “not supporting” of recreational use due to measurement of pathogens. This differs from the reporting by the states for impaired waters as this report focuses only on pathogens, because they are a primary indicator of public health.

Unknown Water Quality: Waters that are not assessed or for which insufficient information is available to determine whether recreational use is acceptable or impacted. This is equivalent to a “not assessed” determination by the states.

The Estuary Program quantified the extent of waters in each classification, including: (1) miles of streams and rivers, (2) acres of lakes and ponds, and (3) square miles of estuarine waters. We analyzed the metrics for the entire Narragansett Bay watershed and for individual Narragansett Bay basins, and reported the percentage of the total state-assessed water bodies for each classification.

The Estuary Program used the Assessment Database for 2014 from each state to extract, synthesize, and analyze the status of each indicator (MADEP 2015, RIDEM 2015). From the Assessment Databases, data were selected and synthesized by watershed, designated water use (primary and secondary recreational uses), attainment, and cause of impairment. Designated uses were controlled individually by primary and secondary contact for recreational use, and waterbodies were reclassified according to the

4

Estuary Program’s classification scheme. We performed geospatial analyses to calculate total extents across watershed scales (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Diagram of methods and state data used to calculate metrics of water quality conditions for recreational use.

The results are largely consistent with the Integrated Lists developed by each state. However, our particular focus on pathogen impairment in this report produces a somewhat divergent outcome. Our classifications of “acceptable water quality” and “unknown water quality” are equivalent to “fully supporting” and “not assessed or insufficient information” respectively. Our “impacted by pollutants of concern” category will in many cases be consistent with “not supporting” findings by the states. However, the analysis in this report focuses solely on pathogens as a primary indicator of public health and thus do not capture all of the impairments that may be caused by other pollutants (such as metals), and the overall percentages and extents are expected to differ. As a result, percentages will not equal 100 percent, as the Estuary Program’s classification systems excludes water bodies designated as impaired on the basis of other parameters that are tested in state-assessed waters. For example, if a water body was not tested for pathogens and yet is designated as impaired, this impairment was due to other parameter(s) (e.g., metals) and thus it is excluded from our analysis. Note that waters impacted for pathogens may be impaired for other parameters.

4. STATUS

5

A. Narragansett BayNarragansett Bay includes nearly 200 square miles of estuarine waters, and the states of Rhode Island and Massachusetts collectively assessed roughly 154 square miles, representing 79 percent of the Bay. Most of the unassessed Bay waters were located south of Aquidneck Island (see Figure 2). In the Narragansett Bay watershed, 37 percent of the stream and river miles (over 1,300 miles of the total 3,550 miles) and 83 percent of the pond and lake acres (nearly 33,800 acres of the total 40,900 acres) were assessed for water quality by the states (Table 2).

Table 2. Extent of state-assessed waters in Narragansett Bay and its watershed. Total areas for National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and Bay waters are included for reference.

Water TypeAssessed by Massachuse

tts DEP

Assessed by Rhode

Island DEM

Total Assesse

d by States

Total NHD or

Bay Waters

Percent of All

Waters Assesse

d by States(1)

Estuarine Waters (Square Miles)

10 144 154 196 79

Streams and Rivers (Miles)

451(2) 886(2) 1,337 3,578 37

Ponds and Lakes (Acres) 20,586 13,210 33,796 40,910(3) 83

(1) Percentage of total state-assessed waters in NHD streams/rivers, NHD lakes/ponds, or Bay waters.(2) An estimated 4 miles of MADEP-assessed segments of Runnins River and Blackstone River were removed from analysis where the features both crossed outside of the state border and were duplicated in RIDEM GIS features.(3) NHD lakes, ponds, and reservoirs greater than 1 acre.

The large majority of Narragansett Bay’s estuarine waters were considered acceptable for recreational use (85 percent) (Table 3; Figure 2). Most of the 5 percent of unassessed estuarine waters, as previously stated, lay between the southern waters of Aquidneck Island and Rhode Island Sound, referred to as the Mouth of the Bay. Areas characterized as impacted by pathogens (10 percent) included the upper portion of the Providence River estuary, parts of Mount Hope Bay, and some harbors with high-density development (e.g., Newport, Barrington/Warren) (Figure 3).

6

Figure 2. Area (square miles) and percent of estuarine waters of Narragansett Bay classified as acceptable for swimming and boating, impacted by pathogens, or unassessed for recreational use.

7

Figure 3. Water quality conditions for recreational use of streams, lakes, and the estuary of Narragansett Bay and its watershed.

8

Table 3. Extent and percent of estuarine waters, streams and rivers, and lakes and ponds in Narragansett Bay and its watershed that were classified as acceptable for swimming and boating, impacted by pathogens, or unassessed for recreational use.

Water Type

Total Assess

ed

Extent1 Percent of Total Assessed

Acceptable

Impacted by

Pathogens

Unassessed

Acceptable

Impacted by

Pathogens

Unassessed


154 130 15 8 85 10 5


1,337 272 481 549 20 36 41

Lakes and Ponds (Acres)

33,796 12,734 333 17,566 38 1 52

1Extent does not include waters designated as impaired for parameters other than pathogens for recreational use.

Across the entire Narragansett Bay watershed, greater extents of streams and rivers (36 percent) were classified as impacted by pathogens than as acceptable for recreational use (only 20 percent) (Table 3). The Pawtuxet River basin supported the greatest relative extent of streams and rivers classified as acceptable (48 percent) and the least relative extent of streams and rivers impacted for recreation by pathogens (24 percent; Table 4). Meanwhile, the Taunton River basin was characterized by the least extent of waters considered acceptable for recreation (7 percent) (Table 4; Figure 4). The Taunton River basin was not definitively the most impacted basin. The majority (61 percent) of streams and rivers in it remained of unknown water quality or were not assessed for recreational use. The Coastal Narragansett Bay basin contained the greatest extent of pathogen-impacted streams and rivers (46 percent), followed by the Blackstone River basin (37 percent impacted). Nearly half of streams and rivers in the Coastal Narragansett Bay Basin and Blackstone River (42 percent and 39 percent respectively) remained of unknown water quality.

Table 4. Extent and percent of streams and rivers in the basins of the Narragansett Bay watershed that were classified as acceptable for swimming and boating, impacted by pathogens, or unassessed for recreational use. Basins Total

AssessExtent of Streams/Rivers

(Miles)1Percent of Total Assessed

Stream/River Miles

9

ed (Miles)

Acceptable

Impacted by

Pathogens

Unassessed

Acceptable

Impactedby

Pathogens

Unassessed

Pawtuxet River Basin

330 157 79 94 48 24 28

Blackstone River Basin

351 48 131 136 14 37 39

Coastal Narragansett Bay Basin

430 51 198 181 12 46 42

Taunton River Basin

226 16 73 137 7 32 61


Table 5. Extent and percent of ponds and lakes in the basins of the Narragansett Bay watershed that were classified as acceptable for swimming and boating, impacted by pathogens, or unassessed for recreational use.

Basins

Total Assess

ed (Acres

)

Extent of Ponds/Lakes (Acres)1

Percent of Total Assessed Pond/Lake Acreage

Acceptable

Impacted by

Pathogens

Unassessed

Acceptable

Impacted by

Pathogens

Unassessed

Pawtuxet River 6,897 5,484 217 1,196 80 3 17Coastal Narragansett Bay

8,003 3,339 42 4,569 42 0.5 57

Blackstone River 7,833 1,665 38 4,511 21 0.5 58Taunton River 11,062 2,245 36 7,290 20 0.3 66


Figure 4 illustrates the total miles of streams and rivers in each basin by water quality category and by state. It should be noted that Massachusetts has a much greater network of streams and rivers under its jurisdiction, but monitoring of this large network is limited (Table 6). As a result, Rhode Island assessments appear relatively larger, reflecting the capacity of its programs to analyze a greater number of streams and rivers per unit area compared to Massachusetts. Additionally, a greater percentage of Rhode Island

10

falls within Narragansett Bay watershed boundaries. The Pawtuxet River basin is completely within Rhode Island, and the Taunton River basin is completely within Massachusetts, while the Coastal Narragansett Bay basin and the Blackstone River basin span the Rhode Island-Massachusetts border. State breakdowns are included in Figure 4.

Table 6. Extent of streams and rivers by state relative to the total miles of assessed waterbodies within the Narragansett Bay watershed. Extent of Assessed Streams and Rivers by State

Total Assessed Miles and Percent by Category1

Acceptable for Recreational

UseImpacted by

PathogensUnassessed for

Recreational Use

Narragansett Bay Watershed

272 481 549

Massachusetts 44.0 (16%) 176.2(37%) 194.4(35%)Rhode Island 227.9(84%) 304.5(63%) 354.3(65%)


11

Figure 4. Extent (miles) of streams and rivers classified for recreational use in the Narragansett Bay watershed by state within each basin.

Impairment of recreational use by pathogens among ponds and lakes was low across all ponds and lakes (1 percent) and across all basins (less than 3 percent) (Tables 3 and 5). Conversely, the relative extent of ponds and lakes of unknown recreational quality was high, as greater than half of all ponds and lakes in the Narragansett Bay watershed remained of unknown quality for recreational uses.

The Pawtuxet River basin supported the greatest extent of acceptable ponds and lakes (80 percent) and was also the most comprehensively assessed basin, with the smallest actual extent of ponds and lakes remaining of unknown status (17 percent) (Table 4). The Taunton River basin supported the least relative extent of ponds and lakes considered acceptable for recreation (20 percent) and, again, the greatest relative extent of ponds and lakes of unknown water quality (66 percent). Figure 5 illustrates the relative percentages of ponds and lakes in each basin by water quality category and by state, representing the overall water quality conditions for recreational use. The majority of the ponds and lakes have been assessed in Rhode Island’s waters (over 80 percent), and were classified as either acceptable for recreational use or impacted by pathogens. Over 85 percent were unassessed for recreational use in the portion of the Bay’s watershed in Massachusetts (Table 7). Due to the larger size of the state, Massachusetts has a much greater number of ponds and lakes under its jurisdiction compared to Rhode Island, making comprehensive assessment more difficult.Table 7. Extent of lakes and ponds by state relative to the total acreage of assessed waterbodies within Narragansett Bay watershed. Extent of Assessed Ponds and Lakes by State

Total Acreage and Percent by Category1

Acceptable for Recreational

UseImpacted by

PathogensUnassessed for

Recreational Use

Narragansett Bay Watershed 12,734 333 17,566

Massachusetts 2,245 (18%) 36 (11%) 15,142 (86%)Rhode Island 10,489 (82%) 297 (89%) 2,423 (14%)

1Extent does not include waters designated as impacted for parameters other than pathogens for recreational use.

12

Figure 5. Relative extents (in percent of acreage) of ponds and lakes classified for recreational use in the Narragansett Bay watershed by state within each basin.

B. Little Narragansett BayIn the Rhode Island sections of Little Narragansett Bay, 62 percent of all estuarine waters and the majority of fresh waters (53 percent of streams and rivers, and 88 percent of lakes and ponds) were classified as acceptable for recreational uses. Most of the estuarine waters in Little Narragansett Bay fall within Connecticut, and those data were not included this report. Much of the Pawcatuck and Wood Rivers has been classified as impacted for recreation (Table 8).

Table 8. Extent and percent of estuarine waters, streams and rivers, and lakes and ponds in Little Narragansett Bay and its watershed by category.

Water Type

Total Assess

ed


Acceptable

Impacted by

Pathogens

Unassessed

Acceptable

Impacted by

Pathogens

Unassessed

Estuarine 1.4 0.9 0.6 0 62 38 0

13

Waters (Square Miles)Streams and Rivers (Miles)

305 163 109 33 53 36 11


3,486 3,066 0 420 88 0 12


C. Southwest Coastal PondsOverall, the coastal ponds were classified as acceptable for recreational uses. Impairment by pathogens was concentrated in the streams and rivers flowing into the Saugatucket River and the uppermost portion of Point Judith Pond (Table 9).

Table 9. Extent and percent of estuarine waters, streams and rivers, and lakes and ponds in the Southwest Coastal Ponds and its watershed by category.

Water Type

Total Assess

ed


Acceptable

Impacted by

Pathogens

Unassessed

Acceptable

Impacted by

PathogensUnasses

sed


8.7 8.4 0.1 0.1 97 1 2


42 0 23 19 0 54 46


713 570 0 143 80 0 20

5. DISCUSSION

Overall, estuarine waters in Narragansett Bay largely support recreational uses, with 85 percent classified as acceptable for swimming and boating. The Providence River estuary, the Palmer River, several coves within Greenwich Bay, and Newport Harbor are all areas that were exceptions to good water quality and were classified as impacted for swimming and other recreational uses by pathogens (Figure 3). Additionally, while the northeastern portions of

14

Mount Hope Bay near Fall River remained of unknown water quality, the southeastern portion of Mount Hope Bay was also impacted by pathogens. These areas impacted by pathogens should be a focus for water quality improvements. The heavily urbanized sections of Narragansett Bay have historically been affected by pathogens from the combined sewer overflow systems in Fall River and the greater Providence area. The Narragansett Bay Commission in Providence and the City of Fall River both invested significantly in combined sewer overflow abatement. The tunnel built in Providence stores 65 million gallons, and the Fall River tunnel stores 38 million gallons. Untreated wastewater and stormwater are diverted to these tunnels during rain events and later pumped to their respective treatment plants. As a result, the volume of combined sewage that flows untreated into the Narragansett Bay has been significantly reduced. Additional combined sewer overflow abatement is expected to continue over the next decade or more, and it is anticipated that recreational uses of these urbanized areas of the Bay will improve. As this indicator continues to be assessed in the future, wastewater and other infrastructure improvements may be reflected in additional areas of the Bay being approved for recreational uses.

The Pawtuxet River basin supported the largest extent of fresh waters classified as acceptable for swimming and boating. This basin is mostly vegetated and sparsely developed, which are characteristics that support low pathogen loading (Didonato et al. 2009, Crim et al. 2012). Vegetation and infiltration control runoff into receiving waters, filtering pathogens from localized sources, such as septic systems. Conversely, the coastal areas around the Bay—which comprise the Coastal Narragansett Bay basin—contained the highest relative proportion of impaired rivers and streams, likely because dense urban development and impervious cover facilitate the transport of contaminated stormwater into receiving waters. Impairment by pathogens was generally very low in ponds and lakes across all basins. However, the large percentages of ponds and lakes unassessed for pathogens may have skewed this result.

The assessment of Little Narragansett Bay in this report is limited to Rhode Island. Incorporating Connecticut data to develop a full view of water quality in Little Narragansett Bay will be of interest going forward. The majority of estuarine and fresh waters in the Rhode Island portions of the watershed and estuary are classified as acceptable for swimming and boating. Most of the impacted waters are located within the Pawcatuck and Wood Rivers network.

The Southwest Coastal Ponds watershed contains the salt ponds, which are important to Rhode Island residents and visitors alike for

15

providing recreational, economic, and aesthetic value. All of the coastal ponds are classified as acceptable for recreational uses, with the exception of one small area in the uppermost reaches of Point Judith Pond. Impairment by pathogens is concentrated in the streams and rivers flowing into the Saugatucket River into that portion of Point Judith Pond, indicating a target area for water quality intervention.

Recreational use in Narragansett Bay and surrounding watersheds depends upon good water quality. Overall, the large proportion of waters still unassessed for recreational use clearly identifies the need to expand state monitoring efforts. State assessments inform measures targeted at protecting healthy waters to promote human use and enjoyment of natural systems, and ensure that recreational services are preserved for future generations. In addition, identifying impairment facilitates the development of TMDLs, which are important tools to reduce pressures on polluted waters, allowing natural systems to recover. Above all, reducing public health risks from pathogens and promoting the economic and cultural benefits arising from recreational uses of the Bay by residents and visitors alike should be a primary objective for the long-term management of Narragansett Bay and its watershed.

16

6. DATA GAPS AND RESEARCH NEEDS

As shown in Figures 2 through 5, the extent of fresh waters across the Narragansett Bay watershed that were unassessed for designation of recreational use is substantial—over 40 percent for streams and rivers, and over 50 percent for lakes and ponds. Most of the data gaps were in the Taunton River and Blackstone River basins in Massachusetts and the Coastal Narragansett Bay basin in Rhode Island. Monitoring efforts should be focused on those areas to determine isolated sources of pathogen pollution, as well as to identify waters that have acceptable conditions and should be protected. This finding highlights the need for expansion of water quality analysis programs. Identifying impaired waters informs TMDLs, providing a way for States to continue to develop more effective regulations for bacterial contaminants.

Spatial evaluation and correlation of watershed stressors to waterbodies that are impacted by pathogens is an important need. In particular, future research will need to address increases in precipitation and the percent of impervious cover within various scales of watersheds to catchment basins. In addition, harmful bacteria can be transported via groundwater, most likely from failing septic systems and cesspools. Areas with a high density of septic systems may significantly contribute to fecal pollution to ground and surface waters, especially if buffer areas between septic leach fields and surface waterbodies are small. Studies should be pursued to evaluate potential loading of pathogens from septic systems, including influencing factors such as distance to surface waters, depth to groundwater, land use and land cover, and other factors, perhaps following methods similar to a recent study in Georgia (Sowah et al. 2014, 2017).

7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This chapter was written by Eivy Monroy, Watershed and GIS Specialist, and Julia Twichell, GIS Environmental Analyst, with the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program. We thank our state partners at Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management and Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management who provided all the data and feedback to develop this indicator.

8. REFERENCES

Cabelli, V.J. 1983. Health effects criteria for marine recreational waters. Report EPA 600/1- 80-031, USEPA Cincinnati, OH (first published 1980). NTIS access #: PB 83-259994).

17

Cabelli, V.J. 1989. Swimming-associated illness and recreational water quality criteria. Water Science & Technology 21(2):13–21. http://wst.iwaponline.com/content/21/2/13

Crim, J.F., J.E. Schoonover, and B.G. Lockaby. 2012. Assessment of fecal coliform and Escherichia Coli across a land cover gradient in West Georgia streams. Water Quality, Exposure, and Health 41:143–58. doi:10.1007/s12403-012-0073-z.

Didonato, G.T., J.R. Stewart, D.M. Sanger, B.J. Robinson, B.C. Thompson, A.F. Holland, and R.F. Van Dolah. 2009. effects of changing land use on the microbial water quality of tidal creeks. Marine Pollution Bulletin 58: 97–106.

Van Dolah, R.F., George H M Riekerk, Derk C Bergquist, Jordan Felber, David E Chestnut, and A Fredrick Holland. 2008. Estuarine habitat quality reflects urbanization at large spatial scales in South Carolina’s coastal zone. Science of the Total Environment 390:142–154.

Haack, S.K., L.R. Fogarty, E.A. Stelzer, L.M. Fuller, A.K. Brennan, N.M. Isaacs, and H.E. Johnson. 2013. Geographic setting influences Great Lakes beach microbiological water quality. Environmental Science and Technology 47:12054–63.

Habteselassie, M.Y., M. Kirs, K.E. Conn, A.D. Blackwood, G. Kelly, and R.T. Noble. 2011. Tracking microbial transport through four onsite wastewater treatment systems to receiving waters in eastern North Carolina. Journal of Applied Microbiology 111(4):835–847. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.2011.05105.x

Haile, R.W., J. Alamillo, K. Barrett, R. Cressey, J. Dermond, C. Ervin, A. Glasser, N. Harawa, P. Harmon, J. Harper, and C. McGee. 1996. An epidemiological study of possible adverse health effects of swimming in Santa Monica Bay. Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project.

Holland, A.F., D.M. Sanger, C.P. Gawle, S.B. Lerberg, M. Sexto, G.H.M. Riekerk, L.E. Zimmerman, and G.I. Scott. 2004. Linkages between tidal creek ecosystems and the landscape and demographic attributes of their watersheds. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 298:151–78. doi:10.1016/S0022-0981(03)00357-5.

Humphrey, C.P., M.A. O’Driscoll, and M.A. Zarate. 2011. Evaluation of onsite wastewater system E. coli contributions to shallow

18

groundwater in coastal North Carolina. J. Water Sci. Technol. 63(4):789–795.

Lipp, E.K., S.A. Farrah, and J.B. Rose. 2001. Assessment and impact of microbial fecal pollution and human enteric pathogens in a coastal community. Marine Pollution Bulletin 42(4):286–293.

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP). 2015. Massachusetts Year 2014 Integrated List of Waters, Final Listing of the Condition of Massachusetts’ Waters Pursuant to Sections 305(b), 314 and 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. MA DEP, Division of Watershed Management, Watershed Planning Program, Worcester, MA. Retrieved from: http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/dep/water/resources/07v5/14list2.pdf

Prüss, A. 1998. Review of epidemiological studies on health effects from exposure to recreational water. International Journal of Epidemiology 27(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/27.1.1

Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM). 2015. State of Rhode Island 2014 303(d) List, List of Impaired Waters – Draft. RIDEM Office of Water Resources, Providence, RI. Retrieved from: http://www.dem.ri.gov/pubs/303d/303d14d.pdf

Sanger, D., A. Blair, G. Didonato, T. Washburn, S. Jones, G. Riekerk, E. Wirth, et al. 2015. Impacts of coastal development on the ecology of tidal creek ecosystems of the US Southeast including consequences to humans. Estuaries and Coasts 38(Suppl 1): S49–66. doi:10.1007/s12237-013-9635-y.

Schumann, S. 2015. Rhode Island’s Shellfish Heritage: An Ecological History. University of Rhode Island. Narragansett, RI. 168 pp.

Shea, W.J. 1946. Report on Pollution of the Waters of the State. Rhode Island. Map 1 of Sanitary Classification of Tidal Waters – Present Condition by the Rhode Island Department of Health, Division of Sanitary Engineering.

Sowah, R., M.Y. Habteselassie, D. Radcliffe, E. Bauske, and M. Risse. 2017. Isolating the impact of septic systems on fecal pollution in streams of suburban watersheds in Georgia, United States. Water Research 108:330–338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2016.11.007

Sowah, R., H. Zhang, D. Radcliffe, E. Bauske, and M.Y. Habteselassie. 2014. Evaluating the influence of septic systems and watershed

19

characteristics on stream fecal pollution in suburban watersheds in Georgia, USA. J. Appl. Microbiol. 117(5):1500–1512.

Schneeberger, C.L., M. O’Driscoll, C. Humphrey, K. Henry, K., N. Deal, K. Seiber, V.R. Hill, and M. Zarate-Bermudez. 2015 Fate and transport of enteric microbes from septic systems in a coastal watershed. J. Environ. Health 77(9):22–.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1986. Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria-1986. EPA Publication No. 440584002. Office of Water Regulations and Standards. National Service Center for Environmental Publications, Cincinnati, OH. USEPA. 2016. National Summary of Impaired Waters and TMDL Information. Retrieved 15 September 2016 from: https://iaspub.epa.gov/waters10/attains_nation_cy.control?p_report_type=T

USEPA. 1972. Clean Water Act (CWA). U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C. Retrieved from: https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-water-act

United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1972. Clean Water Act (CWA). Section 303 (d): Impaired Waters and Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C. Retrieved from: https://www.epa.gov/tmdl

20

https://iaspub.epa.gov/waters10/attains_nation_cy.control?p_report_type=T

https://iaspub.epa.gov/waters10/attains_nation_cy.control?p_report_type=T

narragansett bay - water quality conditions …nbep.org/.../water_quality_for_recreation.docx ·...

Documents