The Lake Huron Centre For Coastal Conservation
Advocating Wise Stewardship of Lake Huron's Coastal Ecosystems
3.0 - Availability of Water Quality Information
Generally, the water quality data for the study area is highly fragmented. A significant amount of historical surface water quality data has been collected by many different private and government organizations (see Appendix A p. A1 for a summary of past and current sampling programs along the southeastern shores of Lake Huron).
The data is highly variable with respect to the types of parameters collected and the timing and locations of the samples. Some historical data have been lost. Some data was difficult to obtain due to staff shortages and the inability to respond in a timely manner, or because sensitivities in the information required engaging in a lengthy and costly process to access the data. Nutrient data was generally referenced in reports as nitrate and total phosphorous. Data now being collected at Provincial Water Quality Monitoring Stations report nitrate-nitrogen (the concentration of nitrogen present as nitrate).
Testing for bacterial pollution is regularly undertaken by county Health Units during the summer season when recreational bathers are most likely to be exposed to pathogens in the nearshore (see map 1). This is a mandated responsibility under the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care, and a Beach Management Protocol has been developed to provide guidance for monitoring nearshore water quality.
Routine beach surveillance is intended to consist of a minimum of one sample per week from each sampling site (minimum 5 sites per beach), over the course of the swimming season. Sampling frequency is permitted to be reduced to once per month if historical data indicates that water quality has consistently been within the limits set for recreational use (OMHLTC, 1998). This data is used to calculate running monthly (30 day) geometric means of bacterial concentrations.
Beach testing amongst Health Units in the study area was found to be inconsistent in terms of frequency of testing. In Huron and Lambton Counties, testing for E. coli at recreational beaches is done once each week. In Bruce County, testing for E. coli can vary from one station to another, with testing frequency either once every two weeks or once per month.
|
Ministry of Health Definition of a Public Beach: A public bathing beach means a beach area, owned and operated by a municipality, which has a supervised aquatics program or is staffed by a lifeguard, and meets the requirements of the sampling protocol for sampling sites. The MOH may also monitor any other bathing area, except provincial parks, to which the public has access, and where the MOH has reason to believe that recreational use of the water may result in waterborne illness. The MOH is not responsible for routine monitoring of private residential beaches which are not used by and accessible to the public at large. |
While the Beach Management Protocol allows for a reduction in sampling frequency if historical data show consistently good results, the historical data for a number of Bruce County sample locations did not appear to support reduced sampling frequency. An unfortunate consequence of this reduced sampling frequency in Bruce County is less data to work with and, therefore, less statistical power to identify trends.
Large spatial voids exist in the Bruce County data between some sample stations. The Inverhuron sample station, for example, is about 15 kilometers from the next station to the south (Kincardine Landsdowne). The Point Clark station is about 15 kilometers from its closest station to the north (Kincardine Station Beach). Between these stations is a considerable population of beach users, many with public access. These large gaps between sampling stations is an unfortunate data hole. The Health Units use the Ministry of Health’s definition of a public bathing beach as presented in the Beach Management Protocol to determine what beaches they will monitor. The sidebar is an excerpt from the Beach Management Protocol which describes the criteria for selecting beaches to be monitored. Based on this, it appears that additional private beaches between Point Clark and Kincardine would meet the definition of a public bathing beach based on public access and public use.
Health Unit data also varied in terms of its availability. In Lambton, the data went back to 1984 for most sampling locations. In Huron County, data prior to 1990 was inadvertently destroyed several years ago, and so their data set exists from 1990 to present. In Bruce, data was available from 1994 to present. There was also variability in the types of bacterial data collected. The bacterial indicator was changed throughout Ontario in 1993-1994 from faecal coliform to E. coli. In all three counties, testing was done on a scheduled day and not based on lake or weather conditions.
There were also inconsistencies observed in how data was presented. For example, Lambton County identified the number of times that beaches were posted on an annual basis. Huron County, in addition to the annual number of postings, identified the numbers of days that each beach was designated as unfit for swimming. Bruce County did not present any summary of this kind.
Waste water treatment plants along the lakeshore include Southampton, Port Elgin, the Bruce Energy Centre, Bruce Nuclear Power Development, Kincardine, Goderich, Grand Bend, Forest and Sarnia. The Town of Bayfield constructed a plant in 1999. Goderich and Kincardine provided data on sewage by-pass events.
The Ministry of the Environment has information on public complaints about water quality impairments along the shoreline.
The Township of Huron-Kinloss was the only municipality found to be currently undertaking stream and lake water quality sampling (see map 4). Stream testing has been done in the Point Clark area as part of a Risk Assessment Study for continued development on septic systems in the lakeshore area since 1997. Testing has been done for E. coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. In addition, the Township has been conducting river and lakeshore testing in the Pine River watershed as part of a community reaction to the construction of intensive livestock operations within the Township. This information is available for the last two years and consists of E. coli, nitrate and phosphorous data.
Information was obtained from area Conservation Authorities who undertook some testing during the 1990s as part of the Clean Up Rural Beaches (CURB) program. Faecal coliform was the indicator used in that program until 1993. The Maitland Valley Conservation Authority also undertook a two year monitoring program for pesticides/herbicides, heavy metals and persistent chlorinated organics in 2000 and 2001.
Saugeen First Nations north of Southampton have been collecting nearshore water quality data for a number of years. Beach monitoring occurs primarily in the south Sauble Beach area. Water quality has generally been poorest at the north end of the reserve lands, near the community of Sauble Beach. Sampling is conducted once per month during the summer season at 10 beach locations along south Sauble Beach. Records go back five years, as the band destroys files older than five years (Nawash, 2003).
Kettle and Stony First Nations south of Port Franks conduct sampling twice weekly. One set of samples is analysed by the London Public Health Laboratory, while the other is analysed by a private lab in London (GAP Environmental). Speaking with a member of their Environment Committee, and a staff person with their Environment Department, there were serious concerns about the quality of the water in the area of Kettle First Nation. High bacteria, as well as observed changes in the environment, such as algae blooms and fish morbidity, were some of the causes for concern (Bressette, 2003).
Finally, a number of local community groups have, through the use of volunteers, collected water samples for specific areas of the lakeshore (see map 3). The Ashfield-Colborne Lakefront Association (ACLA), an umbrella group of about 20 cottage associations between Goderich and Amberley, is in its third year of water sampling of area streams that empty directly into Lake Huron. ACLA monitors 12 sites for E. coli, nitrates and phosphorous. ACLA members have been trained by the Maitland Valley Conservation Authority to collect water samples using standard protocols.
Friends of Bayfield River have tested for E. coli at the lower end of the Bayfield river. Recently, this group has changed its focus from monitoring to education and awareness building.
St. Joseph’s Shores community group, north of Grand Bend, also monitor for E. coli. They monitor three sites including one gully site and two lakeshore sites—one north of the ravine mouth and one to the south. This group received training from the Ausable Bayfield C.A. Cost limits this group from sampling more sites. However, with the assistance of the Bluewater Shoreline Residents’ Association, additional sites are being added in 2003.
Water quality information is widely available in Huron County. A comprehensive report on surface water quality data in Huron County was completed by researchers from the School of Engineering, University of Guelph (Bonte-Gelok and Joy, 1999). This study analyzed water quality data , land use, soils, waste treatment, human and livestock populations, landfills and precipitation data.
 |
The Lake Huron Centre for Coastal Conservation P.O. Box 178, Blyth, Ontario, Canada N0M 1H0 Phone: (519) 523-4478 Email: coastalcentre@lakehuron.on.ca |
|
