Introduction
What is the issue/problem? As a consequence of raised bacteria levels in the water, beaches are shut down to protect the health of the public. Closure could be due to many reasons, such as, pollution or transfer of pathogens by infected swimmers.
What current legislation has been proposed to address this? H.R.2093 Clean Coastal Environment and Public Health Act of 2009
Who is affected by the issue?
Who is affected the most? Swimmers who get illness and infections due to the bacteria. Government is also affected, having to spend money to have the water tested in chemicl labs, and sending someone to collect the samples.
Who loses, and what do they lose? The swimmers lose by getting ill, and by not being able to use the beaches for recreation due to closures, and the government loses money by doing the testing of the safeness of the water. Also, at times, the aquatic animals in the area can suffer consequences, as well as carry bacteria and infection into humans who eat the fish.
Who gains, and what do they gain? The chemists doing the testing gain by finding new advances and resources to make our waters safer. Animals gain by getting the bacteria in the water getting taken care of so they can live in healthy waters.
What are the consequences of the issue?
For the individuals mostly affected? Swimmers get infections and illnesses, if not taken care of, serious illness or death could occur. Fish and other aquatic animals in the area can suffer from disease and death as well.
For their families? While taking care of the ill person, the infections could be passed on. If someone is fishing in an affected area, they could be feeding the infection to their families.
For society? It can affect the purchasing of fish in stores and markets"Any fish (store-bought or sport-caught) could contain contaminants such as mercury and PCBs that can harm human health - especially the development of children and fetuses. You can't see, smell, or taste the mercury or PCBs in fish. That's why it is important to know which fish are safer than others to eat" (
Minnesota Department of Health).
What is the economic impact of the issue?
What are the economic costs of the issue, and who bears these costs? Most of these beach monitoring programs are federally funded. Many local health departments monitor the water quality of beaches.
What are the economic benefits of the issue, and who benefits? Health care and insurance companies benefit from the people getting sick from the contaminated water.
What is the social impact of the issue?
What are the social costs of the issue, and who bears these costs? The activities at beaches can drop, losing money at resorts and other beach companies.
What are the social benefits of the issue, and who benefits? If we do have testing of the bacteria in the water at beaches, it can help the resorts and beaches, reducing the number of days the beaches are closed.
What are the barriers?
What are the barriers to addressing this issue? Well, first of all, it's almost winter right now. People aren't swimming at beaches (hopefully). There might not be people in power who support the issue. They might not think it's important enough to act on.
How can they be overcome? Although, most people don't swim in the winter time, people still fish. Fish can be contaminated in the waters, and people can still be eating them. We just need to inform people in power and convince them this is important enough to act upon. Show cases of illnesses that were due to poor water conditions.
What are the resources?
What resources will we need to address this issue? Access to people with power, people who can make a change. Making the public aware of the issue
Where and how can they be tapped? Sending letters to editors, to policy-makers, putting up posters around town and near beaches, educating people on the issue.
What is the history of this issue?
What is the history of the issue in the community? According to the Minnesota Department of Health, in 2001 there were hundreds of laboratory confirmed cases of infectious disease. One outbreak was sourced back to children with diapers.
What past efforts were made to address it? The BEACH Act was made to standardize the levels of bacteria in the water, and testing them on a regular basis.
What were the results? "The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has recommended criteria for beach water monitoring. Congress has recently enacted the BEACH Act that requires states to adopt EPA’s recommended standard and encourage states to monitor and notify public when health standards are exceeded" (
Minnesota Department of Health).
Allies & Opponents
Who would support this issue? People who swim at the beaches that are contaminated, people who eat the fish from contaminated waters, environmentalists, public health officials.
Who would oppose this issue? Government agencies who don't want to fund for the issue. Those who don't think it's important enough to worry about.
Your Recommendation
How do you want policy-makers to vote on this proposed policy? Policy-makers should vote yes for this issue. It is important for the health of our environment, as well as the health of humans and animals.
Posts
