michael ells - surface disposal

151
Exit Strategies Conference Smearing as a Method of Feces Disposal + Public Health Impacts Mike Ells Professor Emeritus Ferris State University Big Rapids, Michigan

Upload: sustainable-summits-initiative

Post on 08-Feb-2017

30 views

Category:

Environment


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Exit Strategies Conference

Smearing asa Method of Feces

Disposal +PublicHealth

Impacts

Mike EllsProfessorEmeritus

Ferris StateUniversityBig Rapids,Michigan

Page 2: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

The Public Health Impacts of Surface Disposal as a

Method of Feces Disposal in Alpine, Temperate Forest and Arid Environments

Michael D. Ells, RS, MSPH, DAASProfessor Emeritus

Environmental Health and Safety Mgmt.

Ferris State University

Page 3: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

History…1995 – Study of surface water runoff in the Muir Snowfield, Mt. Rainier National Park.

1999 – Study of Smearing on rocks in Fell Fields within the Muir Snowfield.

2000 – Study of Smearing on rocks in a Temperate Forest and in an Arid Environment.

Page 4: Michael Ells - Surface disposal
Page 5: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

1995 The Muir Snowfield

Study Site

Climbers, et alCamp Muir10,200’

9,400’

8,200’

Page 6: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

History... 1995 – Since the urine from the Solar Toilets at Camp Muir is released to the underdrain of the snowfield, MORA wanted to know if surface water within the snowfield was contaminated with this discharge.

A study the fecal microorganism, chloride and TDS content of runoff from the snowfield was completed.

Page 7: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

I found NONE!The question then became…

Where did “IT” go?

Page 8: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Predicted FlowpathAnalysis (GIS)indicate that we may havebeen samplingin the WRONGAREA!

Page 9: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

When the “urge” Strikes!Feces in the Middle of the Trail toCamp Muir,

22 May

Page 10: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Two DaysLater theTrail hadMoved to“Accommodate”the Pile!

24 May

Page 11: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

1995 ...At about this same time NOLS began suggesting surface disposal (smearing) as a method of human waste “disposal.”

Page 12: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

History ...Additionally, there was no Public Health data to support this practice.

Page 13: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

The 1999 Project Had Two Parts...

Part 1: What happens to feces and fecal microorganisms deposited in snow in the Alpine Environment...

Page 14: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Part 2: The Public Health Impact of Smearing as a Human Waste Disposal Alternative in the Alpine Environment.

Page 15: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Part 1...6 Specimens were set out on 3 June 1999.

2 “Deep” specimens2 “Steep” specimens2 “Flat” Specimens

Page 16: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Deep Specimens...

The objective was to sample snows beneath the feces to determine the downward migration of fecal microorganisms.

Page 17: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Steep Specimens...

The objective here was to determine the rate and extent of down slope migration of fecal microorganisms on a steep snowfield surface.

Page 18: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Flat Specimens...

The objective here was to determine the rate and extent of migrations of fecal microorganisms on a flat snowfield surface.

Page 19: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Deep-12 June 1999

Note migration

of color fromfecal

specimen

Page 20: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Deep 2, June 3, 1999, Closer (sorry)…Note Staining

Page 21: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

18 Days of Exposure

Note the “Gray” area circled. Evidence of significant desiccation.

Page 22: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

SNOWFALL BURY’S SAMPLES…

A snowfall in early July buried the samples and we had to re-establish the 6 samples.

All 1995 data was taken from the 6 new samples.

Page 23: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Sample Collection...

Samples were generally collected late morning or early afternoon.

Page 24: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Analysis...

Samples were analyzed 24 hours following collection.

Plates were counted 24, 48, or 72 hours later : (FC, E.c.), (FS), and (P.a.)

Page 25: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Findings...

Fecal bacteria are washed off to the surrounding snow or ice.

This does not appear to last long nor are the numbers high.

Page 26: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Snow Surface

D-1 D-2

6”

12”FC FS14 34

FC FS22 640

FC FS34 8

8/1/99

8/29/99

8/1/99

Downward Migration of Fecal Coliform and Fecal Streptococci

Page 27: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Aerial (Overhead) view of

S-2 Specimen (FC, FS)(8/29/99 - 41 Days of Exposure)

ND, ND

ND, ND

ND, ND

ND, ND

ND, ND

All Locations, All Dates = ND FC, FS, E.d., and P.a.

INTERPRETATION: % Slope has no effect on the migration of fecal microorganisms!

Page 28: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Aerial (Overhead) view of S-2 Specimen

(Fecal coliform, Fecal streptococci)(8/29/99 - 41 Days of Exposure)

ND, ND

ND, ND

ND, ND

ND, ND

ND, ND

All Locations, All Dates = ND FC, FS, E.c., and P.a.ADDITIONAL INTERPRETATION: Wind plays little

tono role in the translocation of fecal

microorganisms!

Page 29: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Aerial (Overhead) view ofF-1 Specimen (FC, FS)

(8/29/99 - 41 Days of Exposure)Upslope

Downslope

Left Right6”12” ND, NDND, ND

ND, 2

ND, ND

ND, ND

Page 30: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Fecal Organisms in Feces vs Exposure TimeF-2 (Surface Specimen)

1101001000100001000001000000100000001000000001000000000

7/20/99

7/27/99

8/3/99

8/10/99

8/17/99

8/24/99

8/31/99

9/7/99

Date

Log

of S

urvi

ving

Mic

roor

gani

sms

FCFSEc

Page 31: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Organisms in Feces vs Exposure Time

D-1 (Internal Specimen)

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

1,000,000

10,000,000

Date

Log

of S

urvi

ving

Mic

roor

gani

sms

FCFS

Page 32: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Findings...Fecal Streptococci have a tendency to survive somewhat longer than do Fecal Coliform’s and Escherichia coli.

Page 33: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Findings...

Flora deep within a fecal specimen survive longer, decreasing at an average of one order of magnitude per 3 or 4 weeks.

Page 34: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Findings...Fecal Microorganisms can survive in the alpine environment.

Surface Flora Decrease Significantly over time and average one order of magnitude per week.

Page 35: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Findings...Feces deposited on snow has a tendency to act as a black body and sink into the snow.

Specimens never completely disappeared... (unless covered by new snow!)

Page 36: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

S-21 August

2 Pieces BrokenOff

Page 37: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

S-215 August

Specimen hasBroken into3 Pieces

Page 38: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

S-212 September

Specimen hasBroken into> 12 SeparatePieces

Page 39: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Part 2...

The Smearing project began on 6 July 1999 when 4 smears were established in a fell field at 8,200’

Page 40: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

TK-1 Smearing Site Prep 6 July

Page 41: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

4 Flat Rocks were first weighed,

then smeared

with a “pancake/veneer” of fresh fecal material.

Page 42: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Smears...Two “Thin” Smears: approximately 2-3 mm thick. TN-1 and TN-2.

Two “Thick”Smears: approximately 4-7 mm thick. TK-1 and TK-2.

Page 43: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

TN-1 Twenty Minutes Post Smearing

Page 44: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

TN-1 Twenty Minutes Post Smearing - Close Up

Page 45: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

TK-2, 20 July 1999. Note desiccation

and wasting (on left edge of smear)Two Weeks of Exposure

Page 46: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

TK-2 40 Days of exposure

NOTE: DriedSmear MassTo the BottomLeft of Rock

Page 47: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

TK-254 Days of Exposure

Hard to Seebut Dried SmearMass hasDisappeared.

Page 48: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

TN-131 Days of Exposure

Rock appearsto have almostbeen WASHEDclean!Smear Flakes visible below + undigested corn.

Page 49: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Loss of Smear Material...Smear desiccation averaged 84.4% of their Mass

Low loss = 77.6%High loss = 95.3%Exposure time was 56 days (8 weeks)

Page 50: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Weight Loss of Smears, 1999

05

101520253035404550

6 July 1 August 15 August 12 September

Date

Gra

ms

of F

eces

TN-1 Tn-2 TK-1 TK-2

68 Days Exposure Time

Weight Change Past This Date Seemed tobe More a Function of Rain/Snow

Page 51: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Fecal Organisms in Feces vs Exposure TimeTK-1 (Smear Specimen)

110

100

1000

10000100000

1000000

10000000

100000000

Jul-99 Aug-99 Sep-99

Date

Log

of S

urvi

ving

Mic

roor

gani

sms

FCFSEc

Page 52: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Findings...

Smears begin desiccating immediately and virtually disappear within 8 weeks of exposure.

Page 53: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Findings...Soils surrounding the smears do not become significantly contaminated with bacteria washed from the smears or smear contaminated rocks.

Page 54: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Interpretation...

Organisms succumb to the environmental conditions prior to the breakup and flaking off of the fecal mass.

Page 55: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

So What Are the Public Health

Impacts?

Page 56: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Public Health Impacts...Viruses probably do not survive any longer than the bacteria.

Protozoa may survive LONG after bacteria.

Page 57: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Recommendations...Continue study to verify 1999 results.

Add Temperate Rainforest Component.

Add Dry Climate Component (Eastern Washington Site)

Investigate the possibility of including Protozoa.

Page 58: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

2000 Study

Page 59: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

2000 Study…2 Study SitesMt. Rainier National Park @ Longmire, WA: 7 miles inside the SW entrance to Mount Rainier National Park.

Wet, Humid, Shady, Heavily Forested

Page 60: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Longmire Site Location Map

Longmire

Area Rainfall = 60-140” year-1

Page 61: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Longmire Study Area Site Map

Nisqually River

Page 62: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Longmire Site

Page 63: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Arid Site…Naches, WA: 10 miles on USFS Road 1400 off HWY 12 (this truly is 10 miles of bad road!)

Hot, Dry, Sagebrush and Ponderosa Pine. Open.

Page 64: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Naches Site Location

Map

Page 65: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

X

XStudy SiteLocation

Page 66: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Naches Site Location

Page 67: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

2000 Protocol Changes…Feces smeared rocks were placed in dog crates covered with ¼” hardware cloth.

Page 68: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Rational…I wanted to be certain that the disappearance was not due to coprophagous (feces eating) animals.

Page 69: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

2000 Protocol Changes…

Within each crate, two Thick Smears and Two Thin Smears were placed

Samples for microbiological analysis were only taken from 1 Thin and 1 Thick Smear at each site during the study.

Page 70: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Rational…I wanted to be certain that weight loss was due to natural causes and not specimen collection.

Page 71: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Placing the Smeared Rocks in the Dog Crate

Page 72: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Smears Sampled:

N-TN2N-TK1L-TN2L-TK1

Smears Undisturbed

N-TN1N-TK2L-TN1L-TK2

MicrobiologicalExamination

Smear DesiccationExamination

Page 73: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Data Collection DatesSamples were set out on 3 June 2000.

Biweekly weights and fecal samples taken for analysis.

Final microbiology samples taken on 8/9 September 2000: 14 weeks (97 days)

Final data (weight) was taken on 6 October 2000: 18 Weeks (125 days)

Page 74: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Exposure Period…This exposure period was 10 weeks longer than the 1999 Alpine Experiment.

Page 75: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Rocks at both sites were tare weighed

Page 76: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

A fresh fecal smear was applied to each rock

Page 77: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

N-TK2

L-TK1

Drying evident from thevisible cracking.

Drying less evident -Smear infested withinsect larvae.

Naches Site

Longmire Site

Day 2

Page 78: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

On 8 June, following 5 Days of Exposureand a rainstorm. L-TK2

Page 79: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

07/02/2000(4 weeks)

Naches SiteN-TN1

Longmire SiteL-TN1

Page 80: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

07/15/2000(6 weeks)

Naches SiteN-TN2

Longmire SiteL-TN1

Page 81: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

09/08/2000(12.5 Weeks)Naches Site

N-TN1

Longmire SiteL-TK1

Lens Cover Problem!

Funky Mold Growthfollowing a rain.

Page 82: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

White Stalks and Dots are Mold Hyphae and Sporangia on L-TN1,

6 October 2000

Page 83: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

10/06/2000(18 weeks)Naches Site

N-TK1

Same (N-TK1)Close-up

Page 84: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

10/06/2000

Longmire SiteL-TK1

Page 85: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Results…

Page 86: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Smear Desiccation…NachesN-TN2 lost 92.9% of its weight.

N-TK1 lost 97.3% of its weightLongmireL-TN2 lost 94.4% of its weight.

L-TK1 lost 87.7% of its weight

Page 87: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Fecal Weight Loss vs Time

05

1015202530354045

Sample Dates

Wei

ght o

f Fec

al S

mea

r in

Gra

ms

N-TN-2 L-TN-2 N-TK-1 L-TK-1

Rain in Longmire

Page 88: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Smear appearances were dramatically

different!

Page 89: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Naches Appearance…Dry Sponge-likeFibrous

Page 90: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Weight = 2.0 grams!

Page 91: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Longmire Appearance…FlatNon-fibrous

Page 92: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Longmire

Page 93: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Because the majority of the rocks still supported some remnants of the original fecal smears, the disappearance of the smears in the 1999 Alpine Study was probably aided by Coprophagous animals.

Page 94: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Soil Contamination…

Initial samples of soils from both sites were free of fecal bacteria contamination.

Page 95: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Soil Contamination…One type of fecal bacterium was found beneath one Naches smear, one time.

30 Fecal Streptococci were detected on 10 August.

Page 96: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Soil Contamination…Fecal bacteria were detected beneath both Longmire smears on 3 of 7 sample dates following smearing.

Numbers were highest on 17 June after 2 weeks.

Page 97: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Soil Contamination…

Numbers decreased as the study progressed.

None were found after 27 August beneath L-TK1 or after 10 August beneath L-TN2.

Page 98: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Soil Contamination…Numbers fluctuated from 700’s to 30 to zero to 60 and to zero again.

Page 99: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Fecal Coliforms Contaminating Soil Beneath Rocks Smeared with Feces

0100200300400500600700800900

Sample Date

Num

ber

of F

ecal

Col

iform

s pe

r G

ram

of S

oil

N-TN-2 N-TK-1 L-TN-2 L-TK-1

Red Lines = NachesBlack Lines = Longmire

Page 100: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Fecal Streptocci Contaminating Soils Beneath Rocks Smeared with Feces

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

6/3/20

00

6/17/2

000

7/1/20

00

7/15/2

000

7/29/2

000

8/12/2

000

8/26/2

000

Sample Date

Num

ber

of F

ecal

Str

epto

cocc

i per

G

ram

of S

oil

N-TN-2 N-TK-1 L-TN-2 L-TK-1

Red Lines = NachesBlack Lines = Longmire

Page 101: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Escherichia coli Contaminating Soils Beneath Rocks Smeared with

Feces

050

100150200

Sample Date

Feca

l Bac

teria

per

gr

am o

f soi

l

N-TN2 L-TN2 L-TK1

Red Lines = NachesBlack Lines = Longmire

Page 102: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Survival in Soils…E. coli does not survive well in soils.

FC survives more than E. coli but less than FS.

This has been demonstrated in past studies.

Page 103: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Organism Survival inside Fecal Smears

Page 104: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Naches vs Longmire

THIN SMEARS

Page 105: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

0500000

10000001500000200000025000003000000

Initial 2-Jul 30-Jul

27-Aug

Sample Date

Fecal Bacteria Survival in L-TN1

FC FS Ec Pa

Bact

eria

per

gra

m

Fecal Bacteria Survival in N-TN1

050000

100000150000200000250000300000

6/3/20

01

6/17/2

001

7/1/20

01

7/15/2

001

7/29/2

001

8/12/2

001

8/26/2

001

Sample Date

Bac

teria

per

gra

m

FC FS Ec

Fecal Bacteria SurvivalIn Fecal SmearsL-TN1 vs N-TN1

Ps. Aeruginosa wasnot detected eveninitially so we gave uplooking for it.

Page 106: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Naches…Fecal bacteria succumbed quickly and populations fell to low levels.

FC were never again detected after the initial smear.

Page 107: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Naches…FS detected through 8 September at 235 gram-1 (but fluctuated from 45 to that number)

E.c detected one time following initial smearing, on 17 July at 225 gram-1

Page 108: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Longmire…Substantial survival throughout the entire study.

At the end of the study there were the following populations …

Page 109: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

FC: 384,180 gram- 1

FS: 706,050 gram-1

Ec: 436,090 gram-1

Page 110: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8FC

ECFC

Ec

0500000

1000000150000020000002500000

Bacteria per gram

Sample Date

Organism

Bacterial Survival in N-TN1 vs L-TN1

FC FS EC FC FS Ec

Back row L-TN1

Front row N-TN1

Page 111: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Naches vs Longmire

THICK SMEARS

Bacterial Content

Page 112: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Naches…FC varied during sampling from 0 to 311,000+

FS levels fell much more slowly but eventually fell to zero.

Ec levels fell, rose and then fell to zero.

Page 113: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Longmire…FC increased by a factor of 7X initially. This may have been due to an unequal level of FC’s within each gram of fecal material.

Page 114: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Longmire…FS levels fell rather consistently but were still at nearly 1,500 g-1 before the smear remnant disappeared.

E.c. levels fell 90% in two weeks then to zero for the remainder of the study period.

Page 115: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

05000000

100000001500000020000000

Initial 2-Jul 30-Jul

27-Aug

Sample Date

Fecal Bacteria Survival in L-TK2

FC FS Ec PaFecal Bacteria Survival in N-TK2

0100000200000300000400000500000

6/3/2001

6/17/2001

7/1/2001

7/15/2001

7/29/2001

8/12/2001

8/26/2001

Sample Date

Bac

teria

per

gra

m

FC FS Ec

Fecal Bacteria SurvivalIn Fecal SmearsL-TK2 vs N-TK2

Page 116: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8FC

EcFC

Ec

0

5000000

10000000

15000000

Bacteria per gram

Sample Date

Organism

Bacterial Survival in N-TK2 vs L-TK2

FC FS Ec FC FS Ec

Front 3 Rows N-TK2

Back 3 Rows L-TK2

Page 117: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Overall Conclusions…

All smears lost between 88% - 97% of their weight.

There were major differences in the appearance and “consistency” of the smear remnants.

Page 118: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Overall Conclusions…

Organisms in the Naches smears experienced a much more rapid and more complete die-off than the Longmire smears.

Page 119: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Overall Conclusions…

Organism survival was affected by Temperature, Humidity and Solar Radiation exposure.

Page 120: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Overall Conclusions…Fecal organisms contaminated the soils beneath only one of the Naches smears (FS) and then only 30 cfu’s.

This was probably due to higher heat, more exposure to solar radiation, little or no rain, coarse, sandy soils and to the initially high rate of desiccation.

Page 121: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Overall Conclusions…Soils beneath both Longmire soils became contaminated more quickly and to higher levels.

This was probably due to rainfall.Their survival in the soil for a longer period of time is probably due to more shade, lower temperatures, increased humidity, and the organic (humus) nature of the soil.

Page 122: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Rainfall was noted during the first three days of smear exposure at Longmire with stained water running off from the fecal smear.

This probably increased the fecal organism runoff.

Page 123: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Public Health Impacts

Page 124: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

It was not the intent to test for Viruses, Protozoa or Helminthes.

Since viruses can survive at least as long as bacteria,

and since Protozoa can survive even longer…

Page 125: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Smearing feces on rocks as a method of “disposal” may, under some environmental conditions, have a tendency to build up not only fecal bacteria but probably viruses and protozoa as well in the “disposal” area.

Page 126: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Bacteria could be spread to surface water by rain or spread by animals.

This could potentially lead to the spread of human pathogens.

Page 127: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Smearing would tend to expose the feces and the seeds within, to animals which could then spread them to areas as non-indigenous or exotic species.

Another Consideration…

Page 128: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Smearing seems to be a deceptively simple method of “disposal.”

Much more study needs to be conducted on how quickly fecal organisms would build up in an area where multiple (100’s or 1000’s?) of people would use the area frequently during a season.

Page 129: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Smearing should only be considered in either alpine or very arid areas and under very strictly controlled circumstances.

Page 130: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Ideally, the use of plastic bags to retrieve feces and pack it out is a preferred method from both a Public Health and an Environmental perspective.

My OPINION…

Page 131: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

We still have a lot to learn about how fecal organisms behave in the environment.

Page 132: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

There was also a third project in 2000!

Since fecal masses deposited onsnow (whole) disappeared…Would the same thing happen tofecal smears on snow?

Page 133: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

This experiment consisted of smearing feces on the Muir Snowfield…

and then sampling surrounding snows and feces until September

Smearing took place on 29 July, 2000.

Page 134: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

If you don’t want to look…

TURN AWAY!

Page 135: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

We tried Smearing with a Snowball

Page 136: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

It didn’t work too well because the Feces kept sticking to the snow and was difficult to spread.

Page 137: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

We tried smearing with a PlasticZiploc® Bag as a glove.

Page 138: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Plastic Bags work better!We sampled snow immediately following smearing.

Page 139: Michael Ells - Surface disposal
Page 140: Michael Ells - Surface disposal
Page 141: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

020000400006000080000

100000

Bacteria per ml of melted snow

FC FS Ec Ps.a

Fecal Organism

Levels of Fecal Bacteria in Stained Snow

FCFSEcPs.a

66,000 FC90,000 Ec

Page 142: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Two Weeks Later…Snow Samples 08/11/00No Detectable Fecal Bacteria in samples of 10, 25, 50 ml of melted snow!

Following August 11, the samples disappeared! (that’s just 2 weeks!)

Page 143: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Conclusions…We need to take micro samples ~hourly over a several day period of time to determine the length and extent of migration of fecal organisms.

Page 144: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Conclusions…Fecal smears disappear more quickly than fecal masses on the snowfield.

This disappearance and low fecal contamination levels may be due to the environmental conditions,

And/or coprophagus animals!

Page 145: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Conclusions…Smearing may be a better method of “disposal” on snow in the alpine environment than simply dropping feces on snow or burying it.

Page 146: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

Special Thanks tothe Funders and Supporters of this

Project!

Page 147: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

1995 Study Report

Page 148: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

1999 Study Report

Page 149: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

2000 Study Report(Arid

Environment)

Page 150: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

2000 Study Report(Temperate

Environment)

Page 151: Michael Ells - Surface disposal

QUESTIONS ?