Skip to main content
Log in

Linking on-farm dairy management practices to storm-flow fecal coliform loading for California coastal watersheds

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

How and where to improve water quality within an agricultural watershed requires data at a spatial scale that corresponds with individual management decision units on an agricultural operation. This is particularly true in the context of water quality regulations, such as Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), that identify agriculture as one source of non-point source pollution through larger tributary watershed scale and above and below water quality investigations. We have conducted a systems approach study of 10 coastal dairies and ranches to document fecal coliform concentration and loading to surface waters at the management decision unit scale. Water quality samples were collected on a storm event basis from loading units that included: manure management systems; gutters; storm drains; pastures; and corrals and lots. In addition, in-stream samples were collected above and below the dairy facilities and from a control watershed, managed for light grazing and without a dairy facility or human residence and corresponding septic system. Samples were analyzed for fecal coliform concentration by membrane filtration. Instantaneous discharge was measured for each collected sample. Storm runoff was also calculated using the curve number method (SCS, 1985). Results for a representative dairy as well as the entire 10 dairy data set are presented. Fecal coliform concentrations demonstrate high variability both within and between loading units. Fecal coliform concentrations for pastures range from 206 to 2,288,888 cfu/100 ml and for lots from 1,933 to 166,105,000 cfu/100 ml. Mean concentrations for pastures and lots are 121,298 (SE=62,222) and 3,155,584 (SE=1,902,713) cfu/100 ml, respectively. Fecal coliform load from units of concentrated animals and manure are significantly more than units such as pastures while storm flow amounts were significantly less. Compared with results from earlier tributary scale studies in the watershed, this systems approach has generatedwater quality data that is beneficial for management decisions because of its scale and representation of current management activities. These results are facilitating on-farm changes through the cooperative efforts of dairy managers, regulatory agency staff, and sources of technical and financial assistance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  • APHA: 1995, ‘9222 D. Fecal {Coliform Membrane Filter Procedure}’, in Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, American Public Health Association, Washington, DC.

  • California State Senate: 1993, California Shellfish Act of 199 – Senate Bill No. 417, 4 p.

  • Cole, D., Long, S. C. and Sobsey, M. D.: 2003, ‘Evaluation of F+ RNA and DNA coliphages as source-specific indicators of fecal contamination in surface waters’, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 69, 6507–6514.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • CRWQCB: 2003, ‘Morro Bay National Monitoring Program: Nonpoint Source Pollution and Treatment Measure Evaluation for the Morro Bay Watershed’, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Coast Region and the California Polytechnic State University, 191 p.

  • CRWQCB: 2004, ‘Pathogens in {Tomales Bay Total Maximum Daily Load}: Final {Project Report}’, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region, 78 p.

  • Fischer, D. T., Smith, S. V. and Churchill, R. R.: 1996, ‘Simulation of a century of runoff across the Tomales Bay watershed, Marin County, California’, J. Hydrology 186, 253–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halloway, J. M., Dahlgren, R. A., Hansen, B. and Casey, W. H.: 1998, ‘Contribution of bedrock nitrogen to high nitrate concentrations in stream water’, Nature 395, 785–788.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagedorn, C., Robison, S. L., Filtz, J. R., Grubbs, S. M., Angier, T. A. and Reneau Jr., R. B.: 1999, ‘Determining sources of fecal pollution in a rural Virgina watershed with antibiotic resistance patterns in fecal streptococci’, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 65, 5522–5531.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kullas, H., Coles, M., Rhyan, J., Clark, L.: 2002, ‘Prevalence of Escherichia coli serogroups and human virulence factors in feces of urban Canada geese (Branta canadensis)’, Inter. J. Environ. Health Research 12, 153–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D. J., Lennox, M., Tate, K. W., Atwill, E. R., Larson, S., Olin, P. and Rilla, E.: 2001, ‘Systems Approach for Management of Fecal Coliform Loading in a Coastal Watershed’, in Abstract Proceedings for American Water Resources Association Annual Water Resources Conference}, Albuquerque, NM, p. 221.

  • Mosley, M. P. and McKercher, A. I.: 1993, ‘Streamflow’, in: D.R. Maidment (ed), Handbook of Hydrology, McGraw Hill, Inc., New York, New York, pp. 8.1–8.39.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connell, L., Langlois, G. and Hopkins, D.: 2000, ‘Tomales Bay Technical Advisory Committee Final Report: Investigation of Nonpoint Pollution Sources Impacting Shellfish Growing Areas in Tomales Bay, 1995–1996’, California State Water Resources Control Board, Department of Health Services and San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, 128 p.

  • Ong, C., Moorehead, W., Roos, A. and Isaac-Renton, J.: 1996, ‘Studies of Giardia spp and Cryptosporidium spp in two adjacent watersheds’, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 62, 2798–2805.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pinheiro, J. C. and Bates, D. M.: 2000, Mixed-effects Models in S and S-plus, Statistics and Computing Series, Springer, New York, 528 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Postel, M.: 1988, ‘A Lost Resource’, California History, March, pp. 26–41, and 70.

  • SCS: 1985, ‘Hydrology, Section 4, Soil Conservation Service National Engineering Handbook’, {U.S. Department of Agriculture}, Washington, DC.

  • Sischo, W. M., Atwill, E. R., George, J. and Lanyon, L. E.: 2000, ‘Cryptosporidia on dairy farms and the role these farms may have in contaminating surface water supplies in the northeastern United States’, Prev. Vet. Med. 43, 253–267.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tate, K. W., Atwill, E. R., McDougald, N. K. and George, M. R.: 2003, ‘Spatial and temporal patterns of cattle feces deposition on annual rangeland watersheds’, J. Range Manage. 56, 432–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • USDHHS: 1999, {National Shellfish Sanitation Program Model Ordinance}, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Washington, DC.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. J. Lewis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lewis, D.J., Atwill, E.R., Lennox, M.S. et al. Linking on-farm dairy management practices to storm-flow fecal coliform loading for California coastal watersheds. Environ Monit Assess 107, 407–425 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-005-3911-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-005-3911-7

Keyword

Navigation