2005 - Door County Web Map

Door County Soil and Water Conservation Department 

Door County Beach Contamination 

Source Identification 

Interim Report 

May 2006

The Door County Beach Contamination Source Identification Project would not be possible 

without the help of the contributors. 

Principle Report Editor: 

Vinni Chomeau - Door County Soil and Water Conservation Department 

Report Contributors: 

Vinni Chomeau – Door County Soil and Water Conservation Department 

Greg Kleinheinz - UW – Oshkosh Microbiology 

Rhonda Kolberg - Door County Public Health Department 

Colleen McDermott - UW – Oshkosh Microbiology 

Meredith B. Nevers - US Geological Survey 

Lake Michigan Ecological Research Station 

William Schuster - Door County Soil and Water Conservation Department 

Richard L. Whitman -US Geological Survey 

Lake Michigan Ecological Research Station 

Primary Financial Contributor: 

Wisconsin Coastal Management Program 

Additional Financial Contributors: 

City of Sturgeon Bay 

Clark Lake Advancement Association 

Door County Chamber of Commerce 

Door County Economic Development Corporation 

Door County Public Health Department 

Door County Property Owners 

Town of Liberty Grove 

Town of Sevastopol 

Town of Sturgeon Bay 

Village of Ephraim 

Sturgeon Bay Jaycees 

In-kind Supporters: 

Bay Shore Property Owners Association 

Bay Shore Outdoor Store 

Lyle Burnt 

Crossroads at Big Creek 

Door County Sanitarian Department 

Door County Parks Department 

Fish Creek Watershed Study Group 

Newport State Park 

Peninsula State Park 

Rock Island State Park 

Judy and Albert Scherb 

Ship Yard Marina 

University of Wisconsin Oshkosh Microbiology Department 

University of Wisconsin Milwaukee – Water Institute 

US Coast Guard – Sturgeon Bay Station 

US Geological Survey - Lake Michigan Ecological Research Station 

Whitefish Dunes State Park

UW Oshkosh Beach Data Collection and Analysis Team 

Amanda Griesbach 

Tabitha Zehms 

Katie Voss 

Dustin Gross 

Jason Mankowski 

Dale Lange 

Amanda Brown 

Joe Felt 

Brenda Larson 

Candace Otte 

Angela Kiefer

Table of Contents 

Introduction......................................................................................................................................1 

Results and Recommendations per Beach .......................................................................................2 

Door County Beaches Located in the Sturgeon Bay Canal ........................................................ 2 

Otumba Park Beach .................................................................................................................2 

Sunset Park Beach (Sturgeon Bay) ..........................................................................................4 

Door County Beaches Located on Green Bay ............................................................................ 6 

Fish Creek Beach .....................................................................................................................6 

Ephraim Beach.........................................................................................................................8 

Sister Bay Park Beach..............................................................................................................9 

Ellison Bay Park Beach .........................................................................................................11 

Egg Harbor Park Beach .........................................................................................................12 

Murphy Park Beach ...............................................................................................................14 

Nicolet Bay Beach – Peninsula State Park ............................................................................15 

Haines Park Beach .................................................................................................................17 

Door County Beaches on Lake Michigan................................................................................. 17 

Whitefish Dunes State Park Beach ........................................................................................18 

Baileys Harbor Ridges Beach ................................................................................................19 

Portage Park Beach................................................................................................................21 

Newport State Park Beach .....................................................................................................22 

Lakeside Beach ......................................................................................................................22 

Europe Bay Park Beach .........................................................................................................24 

Sturgeon Bay Recreational Area Canal Beach ......................................................................25 

Sandy Bay Beach ...................................................................................................................26 

Anclam Park Beach................................................................................................................27 

Whitefish Bay ........................................................................................................................28 

Door County Beaches on Washington and Rock Island........................................................... 28 

Sand Dunes Beach .................................................................................................................28 

School House Beach ..............................................................................................................29 

Percy Johnson Memorial Park Beach ....................................................................................30 

Gialison Park Beach...............................................................................................................31 

Jackson Harbor Beach............................................................................................................32 

Rock Island Beach .................................................................................................................33 

Inland Lake Beaches................................................................................................................. 34 

Clark Lake..............................................................................................................................34 

Kangaroo Lake.......................................................................................................................35 

Europe Lake...........................................................................................................................36 

Beach Project Methodology and Results 2003-2005.....................................................................37 

Beach Monitoring Program....................................................................................................... 37 

Monitoring Methodology .......................................................................................................37 

Monitoring Results.................................................................................................................38 

Beach Contamination Source Identification Program ...................................................................42 

Overall Beach Contamination Source Identification Methodology.......................................... 42 

Specific Source Identification Methodology and Results......................................................... 43 

Impact of Physical Features/Conditions ................................................................................43 

Impact of Beach Location................................................................................................. 43 

Seasonal Impact ................................................................................................................ 44 

Spatial E. coli Sampling Methodology ............................................................................. 46 

Spatial E. coli Sampling Results....................................................................................... 46 

Rainfall Quantity Methodology ........................................................................................ 48 

i

Rainfall Quantity Results.................................................................................................. 48 

Rain Event Beach Water Sampling Methodology............................................................ 50 

Rain Event Beach Water Sampling Results...................................................................... 50 

Wind Methodology ........................................................................................................... 57 

Wind Results..................................................................................................................... 57 

Wave Height Methodology............................................................................................... 59 

Wave Height Results......................................................................................................... 59 

E. coli Concentrations in Beach Sand....................................................................................60 

Sand Sampling Methodology............................................................................................ 60 

Sand Sampling Results ..................................................................................................... 60 

Impact of Biological Factors..................................................................................................64 

Bird Count Methodology .................................................................................................. 64 

Avian Waste Survey Methodology................................................................................... 64 

Bird Count and Avian Waste Survey Results................................................................... 65 

Algae Impact Study Methodology.................................................................................... 67 

Algae Impact Study Results.............................................................................................. 68 

Further Study on Impacts of Algae at the Beach .............................................................. 72 

Pathogen Presence - Methodology.........................................................................................72 

Pathogen Presence - Results ..................................................................................................72 

Determining the Identity of E. coli Contaminating Door County Beaches ...........................73 

E. coli Identity Methodology ............................................................................................ 73 

Antibiotic Resistance Methodology.................................................................................. 74 

Genetic Fingerprinting Methodology ............................................................................... 75 

Source Identification E. coli Identity - Results/Conclusions.................................................76 

Beach Contamination Source Identification Methods Recommendations ....................................77 

General Beach Management Recommendations ...........................................................................78 

Appendix A: Storm water Conveyance Systems as a Source of E. coli in Beach Water – Otumba 

Park and Ephraim Beach................................................................................................................79 

Otumba Park Beach .................................................................................................................. 79 

Method .............................................................................................................................. 79 

Results............................................................................................................................... 79 

Ephraim Beach.......................................................................................................................... 81 

Methods............................................................................................................................. 81 

Appendix B: Watershed Study – Bay Shore Property Association Summer 2005........................83 

ii

Maps, Figures, and Tables 

Table of Contents 

Map 1: Door County Beaches Monitored for E. coli in 2005........................................................ 2 

Figure 1: Door County Health Department beach monitoring for E. coli public information signs. 

............................................................................................................................................... 37 

Table 1: E. coli testing May - September, 2003-2005 Door County, WI..................................... 38 

Figure 2: E. coli testing May - September 2003-2005 Door County, WI..................................... 41 

Figure 3: Mean E. coli count for categories of beaches in 2004................................................... 43 

Figure 4: Mean E. coli MPN/100mL by Location in 2005........................................................... 44 

Figure 5: Mean E. coli count for all beaches over the summer 2004. ......................................... 45 

Figure 6: Entire County Mean E. coli MPN/100mL in Beach Water in 2005.............................. 45 

Figure 7: Seasonal Countywide Average E. coli MPN/100mL Beach Levels in 2005 ................ 46 

Figure 8: Depth Sampling of E. coli - Door County, WI, 2005.................................................... 47 

Figure 9: Comparison of E. coli counts at center, left, and right at 5 subject beaches in 2005.... 47 

Figure 10: Rainfall at three monitoring stations compared to mean E. coli count ....................... 48 

Figure 11: Rainfall at three monitoring stations compared to mean E. coli count ....................... 49 

Table 2: Significant Correlations E. coli MPN vs. 24hrs PPT 2005. ........................................... 50 

Figure 12: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Anclam beach 2005. ................................. 51 

Figure 13: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Baileys Harbor Ridges beach 2005. ......... 51 

Figure 14: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Egg Harbor beach 2005............................ 52 

Figure 15: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Ephraim beach 2005................................. 52 

Figure 16: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Fish Creek beach 2005. ............................ 53 

Figure 17: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Lakeside Park beach 2005........................ 53 

Figure 18: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Murphy Park beach 2005.......................... 54 

Figure 19: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Otumba Park beach 2005.......................... 54 

Figure 20: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Sister Bay beach 2005. ............................. 55 

Figure 21: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Sunset Park beach 2005............................ 55 

Figure 22: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Whitefish Dunes beach 2005.................... 56 

Table 3: Wet Weather Beach Swimming Advisories Determination ........................................... 57 

Table 4: Mean E. coli in beach water on the Green Bay side of Door County in various wind 

conditions in 2004................................................................................................................. 58 

Table 5: T-Test Correlation between Door County Beach Water Samples E. coli MPN/100mL of 

water and Wind Direction/Type............................................................................................ 59 

Table 6: Correlation between Wave Height and E. coli Levels in 2005....................................... 60 

Figure 23: Sunset Park Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. ................................ 60 

Figure 24: Baileys Harbor Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. ........................... 61 

Figure 25: Otumba Park Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. .............................. 61 

Figure 26: Fish Creek Beach Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. ....................... 61 

Figure 27: Ephraim Beach Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005............................ 62 

Figure 28: Whitefish Dunes State Park Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. ....... 62 

Figure 29: Anclam Park Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. .............................. 62 

Figure 30: Lakeside Park Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005.............................. 63 

Figure 31: Murphy Park Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. .............................. 63 

Figure 32: Nicolet Bay Beach Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. ..................... 63 

Figure 33: Ellison Bay Beach Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005....................... 64 

Figure 34: Sister Bay Park Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005............................ 64 

Figure 35: Example of Avian Waste Survey transect and sample plot areas in Otumba Park 

Beach..................................................................................................................................... 65 

Table 7: Pearson Correlation of Avian Waste, Bird Counts, and E. coli Levels in 2004............. 66 

Table 8: Pearson Correlation of Avian Waste, Bird Counts, and E. coli Levels in 2005............. 66 

iii

Figure 36: Cladophora glomerata structure.................................................................................. 67 

Table 9: Cladophora Distribution Survey Percentages of Total Samples..................................... 68 

Table 10: Summary of relationships between Cladophora observations and E. coli levels at 

beaches during summer 2005................................................................................................ 69 

Figure 37: Lakeside Park 2005 E. coli samples in Cladophora Mats. .......................................... 70 

Figure 38: Murphy Park 2005 E. coli samples in Cladophora Mats............................................. 70 

Figure 39: Whitefish Dunes State Park 2005 E. coli samples in Cladophora Mats...................... 71 

Figure 40: Anclam Park 2005 E. coli samples in Cladophora Mats............................................. 71 

Table 11: Pathogens detected from five selected beaches in Door County during summer 2004 

and 2005................................................................................................................................ 72 

Figure 41: Quanti-Trays with positive fluorescence for E. coli.................................................... 74 

Table 12: Antibiotics used for antibiotic resistance testing of E. coli isolates and their 

concentrations. ...................................................................................................................... 75 

Table 13: Antibiotics used in replica plating technique and their concentration.......................... 75 

Figure 42: Genetic Groupings of E. coli Isolates MANOVA Results by Beach.......................... 76 

Figure 43: Otumba Park Storm Water Conveyance Sample Results 2005................................... 81 

Figure 44: Ephraim Storm Water Conveyance Sample Results 2005 .......................................... 82 

Table 14: Comparison of E. coli concentrations exceeding safe swimming standards in 2004 and 

2005. Asterisks indicate substantial increase in 2005 compared to 2004............................ 84 

Figure 45: Bay Shore Property Association Watershed Study Summer 2005.............................. 84 

iv

Introduction 

The following report addresses the E. coli monitoring and beach contamination source 

identification data collected in 2005 for Door County, Wisconsin. This report is an interim report 

on the current findings in the beach contamination source identification project. This report 

summarizes relevant results and recommendations for each individual beach in the first chapter. 

The methodology, full results and tables and figures detailed in chapter 2. The appendices are 

separate water quality monitoring efforts in Door County that impact the beaches. 

All findings are subject to change based on both the additional statistical analysis that will occur 

on the current data in the spring of 2006 and on additional data that will be collected and 

analyzed in 2006. This report also describes the additional work/data collection that is needed to 

further identify E. coli sources at Door County beaches. The data and data analyses that were 

completed in 2003 through 2005 will be used to determine the best methods for sampling in 

2006. In 2006 many of the E. coli sources that are not identified will be identified and the 

collective information on the beaches will be used to develop best management plans for the 

beaches and surrounding watersheds to reduce E. coli contamination levels at Door County 

beaches. Implementation of best management plans will be the focus of the 2007 project. 

In 2003 through 2005 data were collected at 28 beach locations along both sides of the peninsula, 

at Washington Island, within Sturgeon Bay, and at three inland lakes (Map 1, pg 2). Ambient 

conditions in the field were recorded, including wind conditions, wave height, number of gulls 

present on the beach, and abundance of amassed Cladophora algae along the shoreline. Daily 

rainfall data were collected at multiple locations on the peninsula. Additional ambient weather 

data were collected, including barometric pressure and wind/wave conditions, at a NOAAoperated 

buoy located at the north end of Lake Michigan, near the north end of the Door County 

peninsula. 

In 2005 intensive samples were repeated at Ephraim, Fish Creek, Otumba, Sister Bay, and 

Whitefish Dunes beaches and nine additional beaches were sampled intensively including, 

Portage, Sunset, Nicolet, Egg Harbor, Murphy, Ellison Bay, Baileys Harbor Ridges, Lakeside 

and Anclam beaches. E. coli was sampled spatially (depth of water and location on the beach) 

and after rain events on a temporal scale. E. coli collected and isolated from these beaches was 

analyzed to determine resistance to antibiotics and genetic identity, and thus determines the 

potential for the E. coli sources to be from human and/or animal sources. Water samples were 

also collected and tested for the presence of pathogens. These beaches were also sampled for E. 

coli after rain events and an avian waste survey was conducted at multiple beaches to determine 

the potential for avian waste to be an E. coli source. In 2005 sand samples were also collected at 

these beaches to determine the amount on E. coli present in beach sand. 

This report is a descriptive analysis of the data set collected for Door County; it includes 

preliminary comparisons of E. coli results with ambient conditions. It also provides some 

analysis of the spatial distribution of E. coli in beach water, beach sand and storm water 

sampling, rain event E. coli concentrations, and antibiotic resistance and genetic identity of E. 

coli. 

Additional data will be collected in the summer of 2006, focusing on collecting water samples 

for E. coli during rain events E. coli. In 2007 the beach project will focus on using the previous 

years of collected data and analysis to make final recommendations for beach improvements to 

reduce potential for beach water contamination. SWCD would like to work with the county, 

1

town, village and city administrators and beach managers to establish best beach management 

practices and to reduce and abate non-point pollution discharge to the beaches. 

Map 1: Door County Beaches Monitored for E. coli in 2005. 

. 

Results and Recommendations per Beach 

The beach results stated in this interim beach report are subject to change based on the additional 

statistical analysis and the additional data that will be collected from beach contamination source 

identification work in 2006 and 2007. This section is an overview of beach monitoring and 

source identification results, source identification recommendations, and current beach 

management recommendations for all 29 beaches monitored for E. coli in Door County. 

Door County Beaches Located in the Sturgeon Bay Canal 

There are 2 monitored beaches located in the Sturgeon Bay Canal (Sunset Park and Otumba 

Park) (Map 1, pg 2). These beaches had significantly higher mean E. coli concentrations in 

2003-2005 than all other beach locations monitored in Door County (Green Bay, Lake Michigan, 

Washington/Rock Islands, and inland lakes) (Figure 4, pg 44). Both of the beaches have storm 

water pipes, runoff areas and or stream that outlet on or near the beaches. 

Otumba Park Beach 

Public Health Beach Monitoring Results 

In 2003 there were 92 samples for E. coli taken in the beach water monitoring program at 

2

Otumba Park beach, and 5 (5.4%)of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli 

/100ml of water) and none exceeded the closure level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, 

pg 38 and Figure 2, pg 41). In 2004 60 E. coli samples were taken, and 6 (10%) of the tests 

exceeded the advisory and 2 (3.3%) tests exceeded the closure level. In 2005 57 E. coli samples 

were taken, and 6 (11%) of the tests exceeded the advisory and 2 (4%) tests exceeded the closure 

level. 

Physical Features 

Surveys of the physical characteristics of Otumba beach show that the beach has two storm water 

pipes that outlet water directly onto the beach, and several other storm water pipes that outlet 

water in the eastern and northwestern sides of the bay the beach is in. Storm water runoff from 

the parking lot and connecting streets is discharged to the beach water during moderate to heavy 

rainfall. The bathroom facility at this beach consists of two flush toilets. The wastewater from 

these toilets and from the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach is treated by a 

municipal wastewater treatment facility. 

Rain Event E. coli Sampling 

Water sampling during rain events revealed E. coli levels in beach water that exceeded the 

advisory level within 24 hours in all 8 sampled rain events, and exceeded closure levels in 6 of 

the 8 sampled rain events (Figure 19, pg 54). There were no correlations between rainfall 24, 48 

or 72 hours prior to high E. coli MPN/100mL in a monitoring beach water sample. This may 

indicate that there is a relationship between elevated E. coli levels and rain events for up to 24 

hours after the rain event. See Appendix A for storm water pipe and catch basin E. coli results. 

Impact of Wind and Waves 

Elevated E. coli counts are related to wind out of the E (long shore) than when out of the N, NE, 

NW, and W (on shore and barrier) in 2005 (Table 5, pg 59). Elevated E. coli counts were not 

correlated to wave height in 2005 (Table 6, pg 60). 

E. coli Levels in Beach Sands 

Overall the E. coli levels in the sand were fairly low (Figure 25, pg 61). There were occasions 

when the E. coli levels in the sand were above the beach water advisory level of 235 

MPN/100mL. The swash zone samples were typically higher in E. coli than the sand samples 

taken up shore of in sand located 6-12” underwater. 

Impact of Birds 

There was no correlation between bird counts or the amount of bird waste and E. coli in 2004 or 

2005, indicating that the number of birds present at the time of water sampling, and the amount 

of bird waste calculated in the survey may not have a significant effect on the E. coli 

concentrations at the beach (Table 7 and Table 8, pg 66). 

Pathogen Testing in Beach Water 

Shigella and Salmonella pathogens were not found at Otumba beach in 2004 or 2005, but 

Campylobacter was found in 69% of the beach water samples taken for pathogens in 2004, and 

in 36% from 2005 (Table 11, pg 72). The pathogens tests done could not identify individual 

strains of Campylobacter. The Campylobacter that was found did not match any of the known 

human strains. 

E. coli Identity/Sources 

The antibiotic resistance testing and the genetic fingerprinting of E. coli isolates collected in 

2004 and 2005 from Otumba beach both indicate that E. coli isolates are from multiple sources, 

3

human, avian, dog and other unidentified sources (Figure 41, pg 74). This indicates that the E. 

coli is not coming from one obvious source, but instead it is accumulating from many sources 

and being transported to the beach. 

Summary 

Overall these results indicate that the emphasis should be on the remediation of the delivery 

system that is transporting the accumulation of many sources to the beach. The delivery system 

at Otumba beach consists mainly of storm water pipes discharging on the beach. The physical 

survey indicates that the immediate potential sources of E. coli at Otumba beach are storm water 

from storm water pipes and parking lot runoff, and re-suspension of potentially contaminated 

near shore beach sediments caused by wave activity. 

Recommendations for additional source identification work: 

Test additional E. coli concentrations during rain events and determining the identity of E. coli in 

the near shore beach sands and storm water pipes, and in Cladophora algae mats. Continue 

avian counts during the beach monitoring E. coli sample collection, and discontinue the avian 

waste survey. Additional sampling for pathogens, especially testing to determine the specific 

source of Campylobacter should be done. 

Beach management recommendations and requirements for the 2006: 

Recommended: considering measures to reduce storm water runoff to the beach. 

Required: post wet weather beach swimming advisory sign at the beach for 24 hours after all rain 

events of ¼ inches with 24 hours. The wet weather beach swimming advisory is required to 

protect public health immediately after rain events that are likely to result in closure E. coli 

levels, since the current method of determining E. coli levels in beach water takes a minimum of 

18 hours to process. 

Sunset Park Beach (Sturgeon Bay) 


In 2003 there were 91 samples for E. coli taken in the beach water monitoring program at Sunset 

beach, and 9 (9.9%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of 

water) and 1 (1.1%) exceeded the closure level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, pg 38 

and Figure 2, pg 41). In 2004 58 E. coli samples were taken, and 12 (20.7%) of the tests 

exceeded the advisory and 1 (1.7%) test exceeded the closure level. In 2005 58 E. coli samples 

were taken, and 12 (21%) of the tests exceeded the advisory and 4 (7%) test exceeded the closure 

level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Sunset beach show that the beach has several storm 

water pipes that outlet water to the north of the beach. One of these outlets pipes delivers water 

from Bradley Lake which serves as a storm water retention system for a large area in Sturgeon 

Bay. Large areas of impervious surface at an industrial land use area along the southern 

shoreline adjacent to the beach result in water runoff during rainfall. There is also a substantial 

amount of runoff at the boat launch that is adjacent to the beach from the parking lot and streets. 

The bathroom facility at this beach consists of two flush toilets. The wastewater from these 

toilets and from the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach is treated by a municipal 

wastewater treatment facility. 


E. coli concentrations were tested during 5 rain events in 2004 and 2 rain events in 2005 at 

Sunset Park (Figure 21, pg 55). E. coli concentrations were tested at 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, and 24 

4

hours after 0.5 inches of rain within 24 hours. The E. coli levels exceeded the advisory level 

within 24 hours in all 7 sampled rain events, and the closure level was exceeded in 2 of the 7 

sampled rain events. There were no correlations between rainfall 24, 48 or 72 hours prior to high 

E. coli MPN/100mL in a monitoring beach water sample. This may indicate that there is a 

relationship between elevated E. coli levels and rain events for up to 24 hours after the rain event 

(Table 2, pg 50). 


Elevated E. coli counts are related to wind out of the North and South more than when the wind 

is out of the NE, E, and SE. Wind out of the N and S blows parallel to the shoreline but is 

somewhat blocked by barriers (Table 5, pg 59). Elevated E. coli counts were correlated to wave 

height in 2005 (Table 6, pg 60). 





taken up shore of in sand located 6-12” underwater. However there were some samples in the up 

shore and wet sand areas that exceeded the water advisory level. 







Shigella and Salmonella pathogens were not found at Sunset beach in 2005, but Campylobacter 

was found in 42% of the samples taken in 2005 (Table 11, pg 72). The pathogens tests done 

could not identify individual strains of Campylobacter. Therefore it is not known if the 

Campylobacter was from a human or avian source. However the Campylobacter that was found 

did not match any of the known human strains. 



2005 from Sunset Park beach indicate that E. coli isolates are from multiple sources, human, 

avian, dog and other unidentified sources (Figure 41, pg 74). This indicates that the E. coli is 

not coming from one obvious source, but instead it is accumulating from many sources and being 

transported to the beach. This finding takes the emphasis off of the remediation of one source 

and places it on remediation of the delivery system that is transporting the accumulation of many 

sources to the beach. 

Summary 



at Sunset beach consists mainly of storm water runoff from impervious surfaces discharging on 

the beach. The immediate potential sources of E. coli at Sunset beach are storm water from 

shoreline and parking lot runoff and re-suspension of potentially contaminated near shore beach 

sediments caused by wave activity. 

5




avian counts during the beach monitoring Ecolab sample collection, and discontinue the avian 










Door County Beaches Located on Green Bay 

There are 8 monitored beaches located on the Green Bay side of the peninsula (Fish Creek Park, 

Ephraim Beach, Sister Bay Park, Ellison Bay Park, Egg Harbor Park, Murphy Park, Nicolet Bay, 

and Haines Park) (Map 1, pg 2). These beaches have significantly higher mean E. coli 

concentrations than the beaches located on Lake Michigan, Washington/Rock Islands, and inland 

lakes in Door County (Figure 4, pg 44). Beaches located on Green Bay had a significantly lower 

mean E. coli than beaches located in the Sturgeon Bay Canal. Seven (87%) of the 8 beaches on 

Green Bay have storm water pipes/streams that outlet on or near the beaches. 

Fish Creek Beach 


In 2003 there were 88 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Fish Creek beach, 

and 3 (3.4%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) and 

none exceeded the closure level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, pg 38 and Figure 2, pg 

41). In 2004 57 E. coli samples were taken, and 5 (8.8%) of the tests exceeded the advisory and 

1 (1.8%) test exceeded the closure level. In 2005 57 E. coli samples were taken, and 5 (9%) of 

the tests exceeded the advisory and 3 (5%) test exceeded the closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Fish Creek beach show that the beach has a storm 

water pipe that outlets storm water directly onto the beach. Storm water runs off from the 

parking lot and connecting streets onto the beach. There are two storm water pipes that outlet 

water upstream from the mouth of a creek (Fish Creek), located in the eastern corner of the bay. 

There are also several storm water pipes and runoff areas at the marinas located on the western 

end of the bay. The bathroom facility at this beach consists of a portable outhouse and 

wastewater from the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach is treated by a municipal 

waste water treatment facility. 


E. coli concentrations were tested during 1 rain event in 2004 and 1 rain event in 2005 at Fish 

Creek Beach (Figure 16, pg 53). E. coli concentrations were tested at 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, and 24 

hours after 0.5 inches of rain within 24 hours. The E. coli levels exceeded the advisory and 

closure levels within 24 hours in both sampled rain events. Overall the rain event results indicate 

that E. coli levels exceed the advisory level and closure level after a rain event. There were 

significant correlations between rainfall 24, 48 or 72 hours prior to high E. coli MPN/100mL and 

E. coli levels in a monitoring beach water sample. This may indicate that there is a relationship 

6

etween elevated E. coli levels and rain events for up to 72 hours after the rain event (Table 2, pg 

50). 


In 2005 there was no correlation found between elevated E. coli counts and wind. There was a 

correlation between elevated E. coli counts and wave height in 2005 (Table 6, pg 60). 












There were no pathogens (Shigella, Salmonella, Campylobacter) found in the beach water at 

Fish Creek beach in 2005. 



2004 and 2005 from Fish Creek beach indicate that E. coli isolates are from multiple sources, 

human, avian, dog and other unidentified sources (Figure 41, pg Figure 41: Quanti-Trays with 

positive fluorescence for E. coli). This indicates that the E. coli is not coming from one obvious 

source, but instead it is accumulating from many sources and being transported to the beach. 

This finding takes the emphasis off of the remediation of one source and places it on remediation 

of the delivery system that is transporting the accumulation of many sources to the beach. 

Summary 



at Fish Creek Beach consists mainly of storm water pipe and parking lot runoff discharging on 

the beach. The immediate potential sources of E. coli at Fish Creek beach are storm water from 

storm water outfall pipes located near the beach, and parking lot runoff, and re-suspension 

caused by wave activity of potentially contaminated near shore beach sediments. 





waste survey. No additional water samples need to be taken at Fish Creek beach for pathogens 

unless a problem arises that indicates a need. 





7




Ephraim Beach 


In 2003 there were 86 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Ephraim beach, 

and none of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory (235 E. coli /100ml of water) or closure 

levels (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, pg 38 and Figure 2, pg 41). In 2004 there were 

57 E. coli samples taken, and none of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory or closure levels. In 

2005 56 E. coli samples were taken, and 3 (5%) of the tests exceeded the advisory and 1 (2%) 

test exceeded the closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Ephraim beach show that the beach has multiple storm 

water pipes that discharge around the bay and three streams that outlet water, one in the 

southwestern and two in the northeastern regions of the bay. Storm water runoff from the 

parking lot and connecting streets discharges through a relatively small storm water pipe near the 

beach. There bathroom facility at this beach consists of two flush toilets. The wastewater from 

these toilets and from the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach is treated by a 

municipal wastewater treatment facility. 


In 2004 and 2005 E. coli concentrations were tested at 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours after 0.25 

inches of rain within 24 hours. The E. coli levels exceeded the advisory and closure levels 

within 24 hours in 4 sampled rain events (Figure 15, pg 52). Overall the rain event results 

indicate that E. coli levels exceed the advisory level and closure level after a rain event. There 

were significant correlations between rainfall 24, 48 or 72 hours prior to high E. coli 

MPN/100mL and E. coli levels in a monitoring beach water sample. This may indicate that there 

is a relationship between elevated E. coli levels and rain events for up to 72 hours after the rain 

event (Table 2, pg 50). 


In 2005 elevated Ecolab counts at Ephraim beach are related to wind out of the N, W, NW, NE, 

and SW (long and onshore) more than when out of the E, SE, and S (offshore) (Table 5, pg 59). 

There was no correlation between elevated E. coli counts and wave height in 2005. 











8


There were no pathogens (Shigella, Salmonella, Campylobacter) were found in the Ephraim 

beach water in 2005. 



2004 and 2005 from Ephraim beach indicate that E. coli isolates are from multiple sources, 



and being transported to the beach. This finding takes the emphasis off of the remediation of one 

source and places it on remediation of the delivery system that is transporting the accumulation 

of many sources to the beach. 

Summary 



at Ephraim beach consists mainly of culvert streams, storm water pipes and parking lot runoff 

discharging on the beach. The immediate potential sources of E. coli at Ephraim beach are 

stream discharge, storm water from parking lot/street runoff and re-suspension caused by wave 

activity of potentially contaminated near shore beach sediments. 





waste survey. No additional water samples need to be taken for pathogens unless a problem 

arises that indicates a need. 








Sister Bay Park Beach 


In 2003 there were 85 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Sister Bay beach, 



41). In 2004 55 E. coli samples were taken, and 3 (5.4%) of the tests exceeded the advisory and 

1 (1.8%) test exceeded the closure level. In 2005 57 E. coli samples were taken, and 3 (5%) of 

the tests exceeded the advisory and no tests exceeded the closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Sister Bay beach show that the beach has one storm 

water pipe that outlets directly onto the beach and multiple storm water pipes and runoff areas 

that outlet in the southwestern and northeastern regions of the bay. The bathroom facility at this 

beach consists of two flush toilets. The wastewater from these toilets and from the residents that 

are within the entire bay of the beach is treated by a municipal wastewater treatment facility. 

9


E. coli concentrations were tested during 1 rain event in 2004 and 1 rain event in 2005 at Sister 

Bay beach (Figure 20, pg 55). E. coli concentrations were tested at 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours 

after 0.5 inches of rain within 24 hours. The E. coli levels exceeded the advisory in both 

sampled rain events and exceeded the closure levels in 1 rain event within 24 hours. Overall the 

rain event results indicate that E. coli levels increase during rain events and exceed the advisory 

level and closure level after a rain event. There were no significant correlations between rainfall 

24, 48 or 72 hours prior to high E. coli MPN/100mL and E. coli levels in a monitoring beach 

water sample. This may indicate that there is a relationship between elevated E. coli levels and 

rain events for up to 24 hours after the rain event (Table 2, pg 50). 


Elevated Ecolab counts at Sister Bay beach are related to wind out of the N, W, and NW 

(onshore) more than when out of the E, SE, S, and SW (offshore) (Table 5, pg 59). There was no 

correlation between elevated E. coli counts and wave height in 2005. 


The E. coli levels in the sand were never above the beach water advisory level of 235 

MPN/100mL (Figure 34, pg 64). 







No pathogens (Shigella, Salmonella, and Campylobacter) were found in the Sister Bay beach 

water in 2005. 



2004 and 2005 from Sister Bay beach indicate that E. coli isolates are from multiple sources, 





of many sources to the beach. This delivery system at Sister Bay beach consists mainly of storm 

water pipes and impervious surface runoff discharging on and near the beach. Additional E. coli 

concentrations and isolates need to be taken from the storm water pipe. 

Summary 



at the beach consists mainly of storm water pipes and impervious surface runoff discharging near 

the beach. The immediate potential sources of E. coli at Sister Bay beach are storm water from 

storm water outfall pipes and impervious runoff areas, and re-suspension caused by wave activity 

of potentially contaminated near shore beach sediments. 

10





waste survey. No additional water samples need to be taken at Sister Bay beach for pathogens 

unless a problem arises that indicates a need. 



Required: none at this time. 

Ellison Bay Park Beach 


In 2003 there were 89 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Ellison Bay beach, 

and 3 (3.4%)of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) and 1 

(1.1%) exceeded the closure level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, pg 38 and Figure 2, 

pg 41). In 2004 58 E. coli samples were taken, and 5 (8.6%) of the tests exceeded the advisory 

and 1 (1.7%) test exceeded the closure level. In 2005 57 E. coli samples were taken, and 3 (5%) 

of the tests exceeded the advisory and no tests exceeded the closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Ellison Bay beach show that the beach has a storm 

water pipe that outlets water onto the beach and several other storm water pipes within the bay to 

the north of the beach. Storm water runs off from the parking lot on to the beach. The bathroom 

facility at this beach consists of several flush toilets. The wastewaters from these toilets and 

from the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach are treated by onsite private 

wastewater treatment systems. 


There were no rain event E. coli water samples taken at Ellison Bay beach. There were no 

significant correlations between rainfall 24, 48 or 72 hours prior to high E. coli MPN/100mL and 

Ecolab (Table 2, pg 50). 


Elevated Ecolab counts are related to wind out of the E, W, NW (barrier) than when out of the S, 

and SW (offshore) at Ellison Bay beach (Table 5, pg 59). There was no correlation between 

elevated E. coli counts and wave height in 2005. 










Shigella and Salmonella pathogens were not found at Ellison Bay beach in 2005, but 

Campylobacter was found in 33% of the samples taken in 2005 (Table 11, pg 72). The 

11

pathogens tests done could not identify individual strains of Campylobacter. Therefore it is not 

known if the Campylobacter was from a human or avian source. However the Campylobacter 

that was found did not match any of the known human strains. 



2004 and 2005 from Sister Bay beach indicate that E. coli isolates are from multiple sources, 






Summary 


system that is transporting the accumulation of many sources to the beach. This delivery system 

at Ellison Bay beach consists mainly of storm water pipes and impervious surface runoff 

discharging on and near the beach. The immediate potential sources of E. coli at Ellison Bay 

beach are storm water from the storm water pipe that is on the beach, shoreline and parking lot 

runoff caused by rainfall, and re-suspension caused by wave activity of potentially contaminated 

beach sediments. 










Egg Harbor Park Beach 


In 2003 there were 87 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Egg Harbor beach, 

and 3 (3.4%)of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) and 1 


pg 41). In 2004 there were 57 E. coli samples taken, and 8 (14%) of the E. coli tests exceeded 

the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) and 1(1.8%) exceeded the closure level (1,000 E. 

coli /100ml of water). In 2005 there were 56 E. coli samples taken, and 3 (5%) of the E. coli 

tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) and 1(2%) exceeded the closure 

level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water). 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Egg Harbor beach show that storm water runs off the 

parking lot onto the beach. There are also several storm water pipe outlets located in the bay 

surrounding the beach. The bathroom facility at this beach consists of several flush toilets. The 

wastewaters from these toilets and from the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach 

are treated at a municipal wastewater treatment facility. 

12


E. coli concentrations were tested during 3 rain events in 2005 at Egg Harbor beach (Figure 14, 

pg 52). E. coli concentrations were tested at 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours after 0.5 inches of rain 

within 24 hours. The E. coli levels exceeded the advisory in 1 sampled rain event and exceeded 

the closure levels in 1 rain event within 24 hours. Overall the rain event results indicate that E. 

coli levels increase during rain events and exceed the advisory level and closure level after a rain 

event. There were no significant correlations between rainfall 24, 48 or 72 hours prior to high E. 

coli MPN/100mL and E. coli levels in a monitoring beach water sample. This may indicate that 

there is a relationship between elevated E. coli levels and rain events for up to 24 hours after the 

rain event (Table 2, pg 50). 


At Egg Harbor wind out of the E, W, NW (barrier/on) is more related to elevated Ecolab levels 

than when out of the S and SW (offshore) (Table 5, pg 59). There was a correlation between 

elevated E. coli counts and wave height in 2005. 







No pathogen testing was done at Egg Harbor beach. 



2004 and 2005 from Egg Harbor beach indicate that E. coli isolates are from multiple sources, 





of many sources to the beach. This delivery system at the beach consists mainly of storm water 

pipes and impervious surface runoff discharging on and near the beach. 

Summary 



for Egg Harbor is direct impervious surface runoff. The immediate potential sources of E. coli 

at Egg Harbor beach are storm water from the runoff area and re-suspension of potentially 

contaminated near shore beach sediments by wave activity. 








Recommended: consider measures to reduce storm water runoff to the beach. 


13

Murphy Park Beach 


In 2003 there were 86 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Murphy beach, and 

1 (1.2%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) and 

closure level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, pg 38 and Figure 2, pg 41). In 2004 there 

were 59 E. coli samples taken, and 7 (11.9%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level and 

4 (6.8%) exceeded the closure level. In 2005 there were 57 E. coli samples taken, and 6 (11%) 

of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level and 2 (4%) exceeded the closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Murphy beach show that the beach has an impervious 

run off area and an intermittent stream that both outlet storm water on to the beach. There are 

also several other storm water pipe outlets located in the bay north of the beach. The bathroom 

facility at this beach consists of several concrete pit toilets. Wastewater from the residents that 

are within the entire bay of the beach is treated by onsite wastewater treatment systems. 


E. coli concentrations were tested during 3 rain events in 2005 at Murphy Park beach (Figure 18, 

pg 54). E. coli concentrations were tested at 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours after 0.5 inches of rain 

within 24 hours. The E. coli levels exceeded the advisory in 3 sampled rain events and exceeded 

the closure levels in 2 rain events within 24 hours. Overall the rain event results indicate that E. 

coli levels increase during rain events and exceed the advisory level and closure level after a rain 

event. There was a correlation between rainfall 24 hours prior to high E. coli MPN/100mL and 

E. coli levels in a monitoring beach water sample. There were no significant correlations 

between rainfall that fell 48 to 72 hours prior to high E. coli MPN/100mL and E. coli levels in a 

monitoring beach water sample. This may indicate that there is a relationship between elevated 

E. coli levels and rain events for up to 24 hours after the rain event (Table 2, pg 50). 





Overall the E. coli levels in the sand were fairly low. There were occasions when the E. coli 

levels in the sand were above the beach water advisory level of 235 MPN/100mL. The swash 

zone samples were typically higher in E. coli than the sand samples taken up shore of in sand 

located 6-12” underwater. 







Shigella and Salmonella pathogens were not found at Murphy Park beach in 2005, but 


pathogens tests done could not identify individual strains of Campylobacter. Therefore it is not 

known if the Campylobacter was from a human or avian source. However the Campylobacter 

that was found did not match any of the known human strains. 

14


The antibiotic resistance testing and the genetic fingerprinting of E. coli isolates 

collected in 2005 from Murphy Park beach indicate that E. coli isolates are from multiple 

sources, human, avian, dog and other unidentified sources (Figure 41, pg 74). This indicates that 

the E. coli is not coming from one obvious source, but instead it is accumulating from many 

sources and being transported to the beach. This finding takes the emphasis off of the 

remediation of one source and places it on remediation of the delivery system that is transporting 

the accumulation of many sources to the beach. This delivery system at the beach consists 

mainly of storm water pipes and impervious surface runoff discharging on and near the beach. 

Summary 


system that is transporting the accumulation of many sources to the beach. The immediate 

potential sources of E. coli at Murphy beach are storm water from the runoff area, stream, and resuspension 

of potential near shore contaminated beach sediments by wave activity. Potential E. 

coli in the beach sediment are most likely from both storm water and fecal droppings in the 

beach sediments and on the parking lot. There is also a potential for individual onsite 

wastewater treatment systems that are in close proximity to the beach to fail and contribute E. 

coli to the beach. 














Nicolet Bay Beach – Peninsula State Park 


In 2003 there were 86 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Nicolet beach, and 

1 (1.2%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) and 2 


pg 37). In 2004 there were 58 E. coli samples taken, and 4 (6.9%) of the E. coli tests exceeded 

the advisory level and 2 (3.4%) exceeded the closure level. In 2005 there were 56 E. coli 

samples taken, and 5 (9%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level and 1 (2%) test 

exceeded the closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Nicolet beach show that the beach has an impervious 

run off area that outlets storm water from the parking lot on to the beach during heavy rainfall. 

There bathroom facility at this beach consists of several flush and pit toilets. The wastewaters 

from these toilets and from the campsites that are within the entire bay of the beach are treated at 

Peninsula State Park’s wastewater treatment facility. 

15


There was a significant correlation between rainfall 24 hours prior to high E. coli MPN/100mL 

and E. coli levels in a monitoring beach water sample. There were no significant correlations 

between rainfall 48-72 hours prior to high E. coli MPN/100mL and E. coli levels in a monitoring 

beach water sample. This may indicate that the rain events at Nicolet Bay beach have an impact 

on E. coli levels immediately after a rainfall and for up to 24 hours and rainfall that occurs 48-72 

hours prior to high E. coli levels may have no impact on the E. coli levels (Table 2, pg 50). 


At Nicolet Bay beach in 2005 when the wind is out of the N, NE, and E (onshore) E. coli counts 

are elevated more than when out of the S, SW, and W (offshore) (Table 5, pg 59). There was a 











Shigella and Salmonella pathogens were not found at Nicolet Bay beach in 2005, but 


pathogens tests done could not identify individual strains of Campylobacter. However the 

Campylobacter that was found did not match any of the known human strains. 


The antibiotic resistance testing and the genetic fingerprinting of E. coli isolates 

collected in 2005 from Nicolet Bay beach indicate that E. coli isolates are from multiple sources, 





of many sources to the beach. This delivery system at this beach consists mainly of impervious 

surface runoff discharging on and near the beach. 

Summary 



consists of beach sediment sheet flow. The immediate potential sources of E. coli at Nicolet 

beach are storm water from the runoff area and re-suspension of potentially contaminated near 

shore beach sediments by wave activity. 



the near shore beach sands and storm water pipes, and in Cladophora algae mats. Continue avian 

counts during the beach monitoring E. coli sample collection, and discontinue the avian waste 

16

survey. Additional sampling for pathogens, especially testing to determine the specific source of 

Campylobacter should be done. 




Haines Park Beach 


In 2003 there were 18 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Haines beach, and 

none of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) or closure 

level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, pg 38 and Figure 2, pg 41). In 2004 16 E. coli 

samples were taken, and 2 (12.5%) of the tests exceeded the advisory and none exceeded the 

closure level. In 2005 there were 14 E. coli samples taken, and none exceeded the advisory or 

the closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Haines beach show that the beach has a stream that 

outlets water onto the beach. The bathroom facility at this beach consists of a portable outhouse. 

The wastewaters from the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach are treated by 

onsite private wastewater treatment systems. 


In 2005 there was no correlation found between elevated E. coli counts and wind. There was no 



Bird counts were not correlated with E. coli. The Avian Waste survey was not conducted at 

Haines Beach. 

Summary 

The immediate potential sources of E. coli at Haines beach are the stream outlet and resuspension 

caused by wave activity of potentially contaminated near shore beach sediments. 

Potential E. coli in the beach sediment are most likely from fecal droppings in the beach 

sediments. E. coli concentrations of beach sediments need to be tested. There is also a potential 

for individual onsite wastewater treatment systems that are in close proximity to the beach to fail 

and contribute E. coli to the beach. 


Test the identity of E. coli in the near shore beach sands and in Cladophora algae mats if mean 

E. coli level increases, or if beach swimming advisory and closures increase. Continue avian 


survey. 


Currently there are no beach management recommendations or requirements. 

Door County Beaches on Lake Michigan 

There are 10 monitored beaches located on the Lake Michigan side of the peninsula (Sturgeon 

Bay Recreational Canal Park, Portage Park, Whitefish Bay, Whitefish Dunes State Park, 

Lakeside Park, Anclam Park, Baileys Harbor Ridges Park, Sandy Bay Park, Newport State Park, 

and Europe Bay Park) (Map 1, page 2). These beaches have significantly higher mean E. coli 

17

concentrations than the beaches located on Washington/Rock Islands, and inland lakes in Door 

County (Figure 4, page 54). Beaches on Lake Michigan have a significantly lower mean E. coli 

than beaches on Green Bay and in the Sturgeon Bay Canal. Three of the ten beaches on Lake 

Michigan have storm water pipes/streams that outlet on or near the beaches. 

Whitefish Dunes State Park Beach 


In 2003 there were 87 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Whitefish Dunes 

beach, and 8% (7 tests) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of 

water) and 2.3% (2 tests) exceeded the closure level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, pg 

38 and Figure 2, pg 41). In 2004 there were 56 E. coli samples taken, and 1 (1.8%) of the tests 

exceeded the advisory and closure levels. In 2005 60 E. coli samples were taken, and 5 (8%) of 

the tests exceeded the advisory and 3 (5%) tests exceeded the closure levels. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Whitefish Dunes State Park beach show that the beach 

has no storm water pipe outlets or streams that deliver water directly unto the beach property. A 

stream outlets water from Clark Lake in the southwestern end of the bay in which the beach in 

located. There is a small potential for water to runoff from the parking lot onto the beach water 

during very heavy rainfalls. The bathroom facilities at this beach consist of concrete pit and 

flush toilets. The wastewaters from these bathrooms and from the residents that are within the 

entire bay of the beach are treated by individual onsite private wastewater treatment systems. 


E. coli concentrations were tested during 1 rain event in 2004 and 2 rain events in 2005 at 

Whitefish Dunes beach (Figure 22, pg 56). E. coli concentrations were tested at 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, 

and 24 hours after 0.5 inches of rain within 24 hours. The E. coli levels exceeded the advisory in 

2 of the 3 sampled rain events within 24 hours. Overall the rain event results indicate that E. coli 

levels increase during rain events and exceed the advisory level during some rain events. 















No pathogens (Shigella, Salmonella, and Campylobacter) were found in the Whitefish Dunes 

beach water in 2004. No additional water samples need to be taken at Whitefish Dunes beach for 

pathogens unless a problem arises that indicates a need. 

18



2004 from Whitefish Dunes beach both indicate that a very large amount of the E. coli isolates 

were from avian sources, and a very small amount were from human, dog and deer sources 

(Figure 41, pg 74). The antibiotic resistance testing and the genetic fingerprinting of E. coli 

isolates collected in 2005 from Whitefish Dunes beach indicate that E. coli isolates are from 

multiple sources, human, avian, dog and other unidentified sources. This indicates that the E. 





Summary 



for Whitefish Dunes State Park is the stream and sheet flow from beach. The immediate 

potential sources of E. coli at Whitefish Dunes beach are re-suspension of potentially 

contaminated near shore beach sediments caused by wave activity and storm water from parking 

lot runoff. 





survey. 



Baileys Harbor Ridges Beach 


In 2003 there were 88 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Baileys Harbor 


water) and 1 (1.1%) exceeded the closure level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, pg 38 

and Figure 2, pg 41). In 2004 56 E. coli samples were taken, and 5 (8.9%) of the tests exceeded 

the advisory and 1 (1.8%) test exceeded the closure level. In 2005 57 E. coli samples were 

taken, and 1 (2%) of the tests exceeded the advisory and no tests exceeded the closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Baileys Harbor beach show that the beach has several 

storm water pipes that outlet water in the western corner and southern side of the bay. There are 

two streams that outlet in the west and east corner of the bay. Storm water runs off from the 

parking lot onto the beach during heavy rainfall. The bathroom facility at this beach consists of 

two toilets. The wastewaters from these toilets and from the residents that are within the entire 

bay of the beach are treated by a municipal wastewater treatment facility. 

Rain Event E. coli Sampling E. coli concentrations were tested during 4 rain events in 2005 at 

Baileys Harbor Ridges beach (Figure 13, pg 51). E. coli concentrations were tested at 1, 2, 3, 4, 

8, 12, and 24 hours after 0.5 inches of rain within 24 hours. The E. coli levels exceeded the 

closure level (1,000 MPN/100mL of water) in 2 of the 4 sampled rain events within 24 hours. 

19

Overall the rain event results indicate that E. coli levels increase during rain events and exceed 

the closure level during some rain events. 















No pathogens (Shigella, Salmonella, and Campylobacter) were found in the Baileys Harbor 

Ridges beach water in 2005. No additional water samples need to be taken at Baileys Harbor 

Ridges beach for pathogens unless a problem arises that indicates a need. 



2005 from Baileys Harbor Ridges beach indicate that E. coli isolates are from multiple sources, 





of many sources to the beach. This delivery system at this beach consists mainly of stream, 

storm water pipe and impervious surface runoff discharging on and near the beach. Additional 

E. coli concentrations and isolates need to be taken from the storm water pipe. 

Summary 



potential sources of E. coli at Baileys Harbor beach are storm water from nearby storm water 

pipes, stream outlets, and parking lot runoff; and re-suspension of potentially contaminated near 

shore beach sediments caused by wave activity. E. coli concentrations of beach sediments need 

to be measured. Potential E. coli in the beach sediment is most likely from fecal droppings in the 

beach sediments and on the parking lot. 





waste survey. 


20


There are no beach management requirements at this time. 

Portage Park Beach 


In 2003 there were 24 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Portage beach, and 

1 (4.2%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) and none 

exceeded the closure level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, pg 38 and Figure 2, pg 41). 

In 2004 29 E. coli samples were taken, and 1 (3.4%) of the tests exceeded the advisory and 1 

(3.4%) test exceeded the closure level. In 2005 34 E. coli samples were taken, and 6 (18%) of 

the tests exceeded the advisory and 2 (6%) test exceeded the closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Portage beach show that the beach has no storm water 

pipes that outlet water onto the beach or the surrounding bay. The Sturgeon Bay canal outlets 

water near the southern end of the beach. There are no bathroom facilities at this beach. The 

wastewaters from the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach are treated by onsite 

private wastewater treatment systems. 


Elevated E. coli counts at Portage Park beach are related to wind out of the N and S (long shore) 

more than out of the SW, W, NW, NE, E, and S (offshore and onshore) (Table 5, pg 59). There 

was a correlation between elevated E. coli counts and wave height in 2005 (Table 6, pg 60). 






Summary 



potential sources of E. coli at Portage beach are from the re-suspension of potentially 

contaminated near shore beach sediments caused by wave activity, and the canal water that 

outlets near the beach and that may have high E. coli concentrations. Potential E. coli in the 

beach sediment is most likely from fecal droppings in the beach sediments. There is also a 

potential for individual onsite wastewater treatment systems that are in close proximity to the 

beach to fail and contribute E. coli to the beach. 









21

Newport State Park Beach 


In 2003 there were 86 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Newport beach, 

and 2 (2.3%)of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) and 


41). In 2004 there were 56 E. coli samples taken, and 1(1.8%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the 

advisory level and none exceeded the closure level. In 2005 there were 56 E. coli samples taken, 

and none of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory or closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Newport Beach show that the beach has no storm water 

pipes or streams that discharge to the beach or surrounding bay. There bathroom facility at this 

beach consists of several concrete pit toilets. The wastewaters from these toilets and from the 

residents that are within the entire bay of the beach are treated by individual onsite private 

wastewater treatment systems. 









Summary 


system that is transporting the accumulation of many sources to the beach. However the lack of 

both storm water pipes and large storm water runoff areas indicate the only delivery system is 

runoff from near shore sediments. The immediate potential sources of E. coli at Newport Beach 

are from the re-suspension of potential near shore contaminated beach sediments by wave 

activity. Potential E. coli in the beach sediment are most likely from fecal droppings in the 

beach sediments and on the parking lot. There is also a potential for individual onsite 

wastewater treatment systems to fail, but there are no systems in close proximity to the beach. 





survey. 




Lakeside Beach 


In 2003 there were 42 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Lakeside beach, 

and 2 (4.8%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) and 1 


22

pg 41). In 2004 there were 32 E. coli samples taken, and 4 (12.5%) of the E. coli tests exceeded 

the advisory level and none exceeded the closure level. In 2005 there were 29 E. coli samples 

taken, and 2 (5%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level and 1 (2%) exceeded the 

closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Lakeside beach show that the beach has a storm water 

pipe and an impervious run off area that outlets storm water on the beach. There bathroom 

facility at this beach consists of several concrete pit toilets. The wastewaters from these toilets 

and from the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach are treated by individual onsite 



E. coli concentrations were tested during two rain events on 5/21/04 and 8/9/04. E. coli 

concentrations for all of the samples exceeded the advisory level on 5/21/04 (1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, and 

24 hours after 0.5 inches of rain within 24 hours) (Figure 17, pg 53). On 8/9/04 the E. coli levels 

did not exceed the advisory level at any of the sampling times. Additional beach water samples 

need to be taken to determine E. coli concentrations during various rain events and beach 

sediments need to be tested for E. coli. 














Summary 


system that is transporting the accumulation of many sources to the beach. The primary delivery 

system is a storm water pipe. The immediate potential sources of E. coli at Lakeside beach are 

storm water from the storm water pipe, runoff area and re-suspension of potentially contaminated 

near shore beach sediments caused by wave activity. Potential E. coli in the beach sediment are 

most likely from both storm water and fecal droppings in the beach sediments and on the parking 

lot. There is also a potential for individual onsite private wastewater treatment systems in close 

proximity to the beach to be failing and contributing E. coli to beach sediment and water. 





23










Europe Bay Park Beach 


There are three sample locations at Europe Bay beach. In 2003 there were 39 samples for E. coli 

taken in the monitoring program at 2 of the 3 sampling sites at Europe Bay beach and 40 samples 

taken at the third sampling site. In 2003 there was 1 (2.6%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the 

advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) and the closure level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of 

water) total between the three sampling sites (Table 1, pg 38 and Figure 2, pg 41). In 2004 there 

were 28 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at all 3 sampling sites at Europe 

Bay beach, and 1 (3.6%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level and none exceeded the 

closure at each of the three sampling sites. In 2005 there were 28 samples for E. coli taken in 

the monitoring program at all 3 sampling sites at Europe Bay beach, and none of the E. coli tests 

exceeded the advisory or the closure level at each of the three sampling sites. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Europe Bay beach show that the beach has an 

impervious run off area that outlets small amount of storm water from the road and parking lot 

on to the beach during heavy rainfall. The bathroom facility at this beach consists of several 

concrete pits. The wastewater the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach are treated 

by onsite wastewater treatment systems. 


At Europe 1 elevated E. coli counts are related to wind out of the NE, E, and SE (onshore), more 

than when out of the SW, W, and N (long shore and off shore) (Table 5, pg 59). There was no 







Summary 



potential sources of E. coli at Europe Bay beach are storm water from the parking lot/road 

during heavy rainfall and by the re-suspension of potentially contaminated near shore beach 

sediments caused by wave activity. Potential E. coli in the beach sediment are most likely from 

both storm water runoff and fecal droppings in the beach sediments and on the parking lot. 

There is also a potential for individual onsite private wastewater treatment systems in close 

proximity to the beach to be failing and contributing E. coli to beach sediment and water. 

24





survey. 




Sturgeon Bay Recreational Area Canal Beach 


In 2003 there were 42 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Sturgeon Bay 

Canal beach, and 1 (2.4%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of 

water) and none exceeded the closure level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, pg 38 and 

Figure 2, pg 41). In 2004 there were 28 E. coli samples taken, and none of the tests exceeded the 

advisory or closure level. In 2005 there were 32 E. coli samples taken, and 4 (13%) of the E. coli 

tests exceeded the advisory level and 2 (6%) exceeded the closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Sturgeon Bay Canal beach show that the beach has no 

storm water pipes that outlet water onto the beach or the surrounding bay. The Sturgeon Bay 

canal outlets water near the northern end of the beach. There are no bathroom facilities at this 

beach. The wastewaters from the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach are treated 

by onsite private wastewater treatment systems. 


Elevated E. coli counts are related to wind out of the NE and SW (long shore), at Sturgeon Bay 

Rec. Canal more than when out of the E, SE, and S (onshore) (Table 5, pg 59). There was no 







Summary 

The immediate potential sources of E. coli at Sturgeon Bay Canal beach are from the resuspension 

of potentially contaminated near shore beach sediments caused by wave activity, and 

the canal water that outlets near the beach and that may have high E. coli concentrations. E. coli 

concentrations of beach sediments need to be measured. Potential E. coli in the beach sediment is 

most likely from fecal droppings in the beach sediments. 




25


survey. 


There are no beach management recommendations or requirements at this time. 

Sandy Bay Beach 


In 2003 there were 39 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Sandy Bay beach, 

and none of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) or 


were 25 E. coli samples taken, and none of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level or 

closure level. In 2005 there were 28 E. coli samples taken, and none of the E. coli tests exceeded 

the advisory or closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Sandy Bay beach show that the beach has a stream and 

a large groundwater spring that both outlet water onto the beach. The bathroom facilities at this 

beach consist of concrete pit toilets. The wastewaters from the residents that are within the 

entire bay of the beach are treated by onsite private wastewater treatment systems. 









Summary 

The immediate potential sources of E. coli at Sandy Bay beach are the stream and spring outlets 

and re-suspension caused by wave activity of near shore contaminated beach sediments. 

Potential E. coli in the beach sediment is most likely from fecal droppings in the beach 

sediments. 





survey. 



26

Anclam Park Beach 


In 2003 there were 36 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Anclam beach, and 

1 (2.8%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) and none 

exceeded the closure level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, pg 38 and Figure 2, pg 41). 

In 2004 28 E. coli samples were taken, and 1 (3.5%) of the tests exceeded the advisory and none 

exceeded the closure level. In 2005 29 E. coli samples were taken, and 1 (4%) of the tests 

exceeded the advisory and none exceeded the closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics at Anclam beach show that the beach has a storm water 

pipe that discharges water onto the beach and several storm water pipes north of the beach. 

Storm water runs off from the parking lot onto the beach. There bathroom facility at this beach 

consists of flush toilets. The wastewaters from these toilets and from the residents that are 

within the entire bay of the beach are treated by a municipal wastewater treatment facility. 


E. coli concentrations were tested during four rain events on 6/7/05, 7/25/05, 8/8/05, and 

8/10/05. E. coli concentrations for all of the samples exceeded the advisory and closure levels at 

different time increments within the 24 hour testing period (Figure 12, pg 51). 












Summary 

The immediate potential sources of E. coli at Anclam beach are storm water from nearby storm 

water pipes and stream outlets, shoreline and parking lot runoff, and re-suspension of potentially 

contaminated near shore beach sediments caused by wave activity. Potential E. coli in the beach 

sediment is most likely from fecal droppings in the beach sediments and on the parking lot. 









27






Other Water Quality Concerns: 

Several observations were made of algal blooms late in the summer of 2004 at Anclam beach. In 

September one sample was taken of the material in the algal bloom and Microcystis was found in 

the sample. The presence of Microcystis indicates a cyanobacterial bloom. Skin rashes are one 

general symptom of swimming in cyanobacterial blooms. Microcystis is a blue green algae 

species that produces the Microcystin toxin. High levels of the Microcystin toxin have been 

known to cause nausea, vomiting, and liver problems in humans. The levels of Microcystis or 

presence of Microcystin were not determined at Anclam beach. Generally it is recommended 

that people avoid swimming in algal blooms. It is recommended that additional water samples 

be taken during algal blooms to determine the presence and quantity of Cyanobacteria and 

Cyanobacterial toxins and the potential threat of these bacteria and toxins to public health. 

Whitefish Bay 

Beach monitoring samples for E. coli MPN/100mL of water were taken at Whitefish Bay once 

per week for 14 weeks. There were no samples above the advisory of closure level in 2005 

(Table 1, pg 38 and Figure 2, pg 41). Overall the tests and data analysis done thus far for the 

beach contamination source identification project at Whitefish Bay beach do not determine what 

the source(s) of E. coli contamination are. Continued beach monitoring is recommended for this 

site. Currently there are no beach management recommendations. 

Door County Beaches on Washington and Rock Island 

There are five beaches monitored on Washington Island (Sand Dunes Park, School House 

Beach, Gialison Park, Jackson Harbor, Percy Johnson Park), and Rock Island (Rock Island State 

Park) (Map 1, pg 2). The beaches located on Washington/Rock islands are impacted by weather, 

wave, and wind conditions from both the Green Bay and Lake Michigan water bodies. These 

beaches have significantly lower mean E. coli concentrations than the beaches located on the 

Sturgeon Bay Canal, Green Bay and Lake Michigan (Figure 12, pg 51). The mean E. coli levels 

on the island beaches grouped with the mean E. coli levels from the inland lakes, both types of 

beaches had the lowest E. coli concentration means in Door County. None of the island beaches 

have a storm water delivery system (storm water pipes or streams) that brings storm water 

directly to the beach. Several of the beaches have runoff areas that contribute storm water from 

the beach parking lot. The potential sources of E. coli at all of the island beaches include the resuspension 

of beach sediments that potentially contain E. coli contamination from fecal 

droppings on the beach sediments, and or the potential of individual failing onsite private septic 

treatment systems that are in close proximity to the beaches that could contribute E. coli . 

Sand Dunes Beach 


In 2003 there were 40 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Sand Dunes beach, 



41). In 2004 there were 14 E. coli samples taken, and none of the E. coli tests exceeded the 

28

advisory level or closure level. In 2005 there were 14 E. coli samples taken, and none of the E. 

coli tests exceeded the advisory level or closure level. 


Surveys of the physical characteristics of Sand Dunes beach show that there are no storm water 

pipes or streams that discharge water onto the beach. There are no bathroom facilities at this 

beach. The wastewater from the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach is treated by 










Summary 

Overall the tests and data analysis done thus far for the beach contamination source identification 

project at Sand Dunes beach do not determine the source(s) of E. coli contamination. The 

immediate potential sources of E. coli at Sand Dunes beach are the re-suspension of potentially 

contaminated near shore beach sediments caused by wave activity. Potential E. coli in the beach 

sediment is most likely from fecal droppings in the beach sediments. There is also a potential for 

individual onsite private wastewater treatment systems in close proximity to the beach to be 

failing and contributing E. coli to beach sediment and water. 





survey. 



School House Beach 


In 2003 there were 40 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at School House 

beach, and 2 (5%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) 

and none exceeded the closure level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, pg 38 and Figure 

2, pg 41). In 2004 there were 14 E. coli samples taken, and no E, coli levels over the advisory 

levels. In 2005 there were 14 E. coli samples taken, and no E, coli levels over the advisory 

levels. 


School house beach is a cobble beach with a % slope. 

Surveys of the physical characteristics of School House beach show that the beach has no storm 

water pipes or streams that outlet water to the beach or surrounding bay. Water runoff from the 

parking lot and connecting streets discharge to the beach water during moderate to heavy 

29

ainfall. The beach substrate is rock so the runoff potential is much great than the sand beaches. 

The bathroom facility at this beach consists of two concrete pit toilets. The wastewaters from 

these toilets and from the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach are treated with 










Summary 


project at School House beach do not determine the source(s) of E. coli contamination. The 

immediate potential sources of E. coli at School House beach are from storm water runoff from 

the parking lot and washing of potentially contaminated near shore beach sediments caused by 

wave activity. E. coli in the beach sediment are most likely from fecal droppings in the beach 

sediments and on the parking lot. There is also a potential for individual onsite private 

wastewater treatment systems in close proximity to the beach to be failing and contributing E. 

coli to beach sediment and water. 





survey. 



Percy Johnson Memorial Park Beach 


In 2003 there were 39 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Percy beach, and 1 

(2.6%) of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) and the 


were 14 E. coli samples taken, and no E, coli levels over the advisory levels. In 2005 there were 

14 E. coli samples taken, and no E, coli levels over the advisory levels. 


Percy Johnson beach has a sand cobble mix with a % slope. Surveys of the physical 

characteristics of Percy beach show that the beach has no storm water pipes or streams that outlet 

water to the beach or surrounding bay. Storm water runoff occurs from the parking lot and 

connecting streets outlets onto the beach water during moderate to heavy rainfall. The 

wastewaters from the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach are treated with onsite 


30









Summary 


project at Percy beach do not determine the source(s) of E. coli contamination. The immediate 

potential sources of E. coli at Percy beach are re-suspension of potentially contaminated near 

shore beach sediments caused by wave activity. Potential E. coli in the beach sediment is most 

likely from fecal droppings in the beach sediments and on the parking lot. There is also a 

potential for individual onsite private wastewater treatment systems, in close proximity to the 

beach, to be failing and contributing E. coli to beach sediment and water. 





survey. 



Gialison Park Beach 


In 2003 there were 38 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Gialison beach, 



were 10 E. coli samples taken and none of the E. coli levels were over the advisory level. In 

2005 there were 14 E. coli samples taken and none of the E. coli levels were over the advisory 

level. 


Gialison beach has sand with a % slope. Surveys of the physical characteristics of Gialison 

beach show that the beach has no storm water pipes or streams that outlet water to the beach or 

surrounding bay. Water runoff from the parking lot and connecting streets outlets to the beach 

water during moderate to heavy rainfall. There are no bathroom facilities at this beach. The 

wastewaters from the residents that are within the entire bay of the beach are treated with onsite 







31




Summary 


project at Gialison beach do not determine the source(s) of E. coli contamination. the immediate 

potential sources of E. coli at Gialison beach are storm water from parking lot, street, and beach 

runoff, and re-suspension of potentially contaminated near shore beach sediments caused by 

wave activity. Potential E. coli concentrations of beach sediments need to be measured. 

Potential E. coli in the beach sediment is most likely from fecal droppings in the beach sediments 

and on the parking lot. There is also a potential for individual onsite private wastewater 

treatment systems, in close proximity to the beach, to be failing and contributing E. coli to beach 

sediment and water. 





survey. 



Jackson Harbor Beach 


In 2003 there were 39 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Jackson Harbor 


water) and none exceeded the closure level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, pg 38 and 

Figure 2, pg 41). In 2004 there were 14 E. coli samples taken and none of the E. coli levels were 

over the advisory level. In 2005 there were 15 E. coli samples taken and 1 (7%) of the tests 

exceeded the advisory and none exceeded the closure level. 


Jackson Harbor beach is a cobble beach with a % slope. Surveys of the physical characteristics 

of Jackson Harbor beach show that the beach has no storm water pipes or streams that outlet 

water to the beach or surrounding bay. A parking lot and marina areas contribute storm water 

runoff to the northwestern corner of the bay the beach is within. There are several concrete pit 

toilets at this beach. The wastewaters from the residents that are within the entire bay of the 

beach are treated with onsite private wastewater treatment systems. 









32

Summary 


project at Jackson Harbor beach do not determine the source(s) of E. coli contamination. The 

immediate potential sources of E. coli at Jackson Harbor beach are from storm water runoff 

from marina area and re-suspension of potentially contaminated near shore beach sediments 

caused by wave activity. Potential E. coli in the beach sediment is most likely from fecal 

droppings in the beach sediments. There is also a potential for individual onsite private 

wastewater treatment systems, in close proximity to the beach, to be failing and contributing E. 

coli to beach sediment and water. 





survey. 



Rock Island Beach 


In 2003 there were 14 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Rock Island beach, 



were 14 E. coli samples taken and none of the E. coli levels were over the advisory level. In 

2005 there were 14 E. coli samples taken and none of the E. coli levels were over the advisory 

level. 


Rock Island beach is a cobble beach with a % slope. Surveys of the physical characteristics of 

Rock Island beach show that the beach has no storm water pipes or streams that outlet water to 

the beach or surrounding bay. There are no bathroom facilities at the beach. The wastewater 

from the campsites and all other bathroom facilities on the island is treated with an onsite private 

wastewater treatment system that is not within proximity of the beach. 









Summary 


project at Rock Island beach do not determine the source(s) of E. coli contamination. The 

immediate potential sources of E. coli at Rock Island beach are from the re-suspension and 

washing of potentially contaminated near shore beach sediments caused by wave activity. 

33

Potential E. coli in the beach sediment is most likely from fecal droppings in the beach 

sediments. 





survey. 



Inland Lake Beaches 

There are three inland lakes monitored in Door County (Clark, Kangaroo, and Europe). 

These beaches have significantly lower mean E. coli concentrations than the beaches located on 

the Sturgeon Bay Canal, Green Bay and Lake Michigan (Figure 4, pg 44). The mean E. coli 

levels at the inland lake beaches grouped with the mean E. coli levels from the island beaches, 

both types of beach had the lowest E. coli mean levels in Door County. One (33%) of the inland 

lake beaches has a storm water pipe that brings storm water directly to the beach. All of the 

beaches have runoff areas that contribute storm water from the beach parking lot. 

Clark Lake 


In 2003 there were 16 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Clark Lake beach, 

and no of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) or closure 

level (1,000 E. coli /100ml of water) (Table 1, pg 38 and Figure 2, pg 41). In 2004 there were 

54 E. coli samples taken and none of the E. coli levels were over the advisory level or closure 

levels. In 2005 there were 15 E. coli samples taken and 1 (7%) of the E. coli tests was over the 

advisory level and none of the E. coli levels were over the closure level. 


Clark Lake beach is a sand beach with a % slope. Surveys of the physical characteristics of 

Clark Lake beach show that the beach has no storm water pipes or streams that outlet water to 

the beach. There is a stream that flows into the lake on the northwestern shoreline and flows 

from the lake just west of the beach. The bathroom facility at this beach consists of a portable 

outhouse and wastewater from the residents the lake is treated by onsite private wastewater 

treatment systems. 









Summary 


project at Clark Lake beach do not determine the source(s) of E. coli contamination. The 

34

immediate potential sources of E. coli at Clark Lake beach are from the re-suspension of 

potentially contaminated near shore beach sediments caused by wave activity. Potential E. coli 

in the beach sediment is most likely from fecal droppings in the beach sediments. There is also a 

potential for individual onsite private wastewater treatment systems, in close proximity to the 

beach, to be failing and contributing E. coli to beach sediment and water. 





survey. 



Kangaroo Lake 


In 2003 there were 16 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Kangaroo Lake 

beach, and no of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) or 


were 15 E. coli samples taken and 1 (6.6%) of the E. coli levels were over the advisory level and 

none exceeded the closure level. In 2005 there were 14 E. coli samples taken and 1 (7%) of the 

E. coli levels were over the advisory level and none exceeded the closure level. 


Kangaroo beach is a cobble/stone beach with a % slope. Surveys of the physical characteristics 

of Kangaroo Lake beach show that the beach has no storm water pipes or streams that outlet 

water to the beach. There is a runoff area that drains storm water from the street on to the beach. 

There are no bathroom facilities at this beach. The wastewater from the residents on the lake is 

treated by onsite private wastewater treatment systems. 








concentrations at the beach (Table 7 and Table 8, pg 66). It is recommended that avian counts 

continue during the beach monitoring E. coli sample collection, and that avian waste survey be 

discontinued. 

Summary 


project at Kangaroo Lake beach do not determine what the source(s) of E. coli contamination 

are. The immediate potential sources of E. coli at Kangaroo Lake beach are from the street 

runoff and the re-suspension of potentially contaminated near shore beach sediments caused by 

wave activity. Potential E. coli in the beach sediment is most likely from fecal droppings in the 

beach sediments. There is also a potential for individual onsite private wastewater treatment 

35

systems, in close proximity to the beach, to be failing and contributing E. coli to beach sediment 

and water. 





survey. 



Europe Lake 


In 2003 there were 16 samples for E. coli taken in the monitoring program at Europe Lake 

beach, and no of the E. coli tests exceeded the advisory level (235 E. coli /100ml of water) or 


were 20 E. coli samples taken and none of the E. coli levels were over the advisory or closure 

level. In 2005 there were 15 E. coli samples taken and none of the E. coli levels were over the 

advisory or closure level. 


Europe Lake beach is a sand and cobble beach with a % slope. Surveys of the physical 

characteristics of Europe Lake beach show that the beach has a storm water pipe that drains 

storm water onto the beach from the immediate roadway leading to the beach. There is a runoff 

area that drains storm water from the street to boat launch at the beach. The bathroom facility at 

this beach consists of a portable outhouse and wastewater from the residents the lake is treated 

by onsite private wastewater treatment systems. 








concentrations at the beach (Table 7 and Table 8, pg 66). It is recommended that avian counts 

continue during the beach monitoring E. coli sample collection, and that avian waste survey be 

discontinued. 

Summary 


project at Europe Lake beach do not determine what the source(s) of E. coli contamination are. 

The immediate potential sources of E. coli at Europe Lake beach are from the storm water runoff 

and the re-suspension of potentially contaminated near shore beach sediments cause by wave 

activity 




36


survey. 



Beach Project Methodology and Results 2003-2005 

Beach Monitoring Program 

Primary Responsibility of Door County Public Health Department 

Monitoring Methodology 

There are two major reasons to implement a beach bacteria-monitoring program. The first 

reason is to protect swimmers from exposure to waterborne pathogens, like viruses and bacteria 

that may make them sick. The presence of E. coli indicates the presence of human and or animal 

fecal matter in the water. If E. coli counts are high enough that there is a risk of human illness 

then a beach advisory or closure can be issued. Another reason to monitored E. coli in beach 

water is to assist in identifying pollution sources that may exist somewhere in the beach 

watershed. 

The beach monitoring program consists of taking a water sample in 24 inches of water at the 

center of 29 public beaches in Door County. The Door County Public Health Department 

contracted with the Microbiology Department at the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh to collect 

and analyze the water samples for E. coli. The Idexx Colisure E. coli test was used to determine 

the level of E. coli at the monitored beaches. The Idexx Colisure E. coli test takes 18 hours to 

determine E. coli levels and reveals E. coli Most Probable Number (MPN) per 100 ml of water. 

If the E. coli levels were found to exceed the advisory or closure levels an advisory or closure 

sign was posted at the beach. The advisory and closure E. coli standards were set by the 

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources according to a statistical probability that swimmers 

may become ill from swimming in water with E. coli levels of these magnitudes. The advisory 

E. coli level is 235 Most Probable Number (MPN) of E. coli colonies in a 100 ml water (E. coli 

/100ml of water). This level is based on the probability that 8 out of 1,000 people will become 

ill from swimming. The closure E. coli level is 1,000 E. coli /100ml of water and is based on the 

probability that 14 out of 1,000 people will become ill from swimming. A sign is posted at the 

beach to indicate the E. coli count, see Figure 1. 

Figure 1: Door County Health Department beach monitoring for E. coli public information 

signs. 

37

The “Stop Closed: sign appears on a 5 foot high post if there are more than 1,000 colonies of E. coli per 

liter of water and the “Warning Water Quality Today is Poor” appears in the same way if there are more 

that 235 colonies of E. coli per liter of water. 

Monitoring occurs from mid May to mid September. The monitored beaches were prioritized by 

the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and DCPHD to determine the frequency of 

weekly monitoring. High priority beaches are typically monitored 4-5 days per week, medium 

priority beaches are monitored 2-3 days per week and low priority beaches are monitored one 

day per week. 

Monitoring Results 

The percentage of beach advisories and closures is different at each of the 29 monitored beaches 

in Door County. See Table 1 and Figure 2 for beach monitoring results 2003-2005. 

Table 1: E. coli testing May - September, 2003-2005 Door County, WI 

Beach Year 

Anclam 

2003 

Baileys 

Clark 

Egg Harbor 

Ellison Bay 

Ephraim 

Europe Lake 

Europe Bay 1 

Europe Bay 2 

2004 

# 

Samples 

36 

28 

# 

Advisory 

38 

# 

Closure 

1 0 

1 0 

2005 29 1 0 

2003 

88 

4 1 

2004 

56 

5 1 


2003 17 0 0 

2004 

55 

0 0 


2003 

87 

3 1 

2004 

57 

8 1 


2003 

89 

3 1 

2004 

58 

5 1 


2003 

86 

0 0 

2004 

56 

0 0 


2003 

16 

0 0 

2004 

20 

0 0 


2003 

39 

0 0 

2004 

28 

1 0 


2003 

40 

0 0 

2004 

28 

1 0 


% 

% 

Advisories Closure 

3% 0% 

4% 0% 

3% 0% 

5% 1% 

9% 2% 

2% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

7% 0% 

3% 1% 

14% 2% 

5% 2% 

3% 1% 

9% 2% 

5% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

5% 2% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

4% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

4% 0% 

0% 0%

Table 1 Continued: E. coli testing May -September, 2003-2005 Door County, WI 

Europe Bay 3 

Europe Lake 

Fish Creek 

Gialison 

Haines Park 

Jackson Harbor 

Kangaroo 

Lakeside 

Murphy 

Newport State Park 

Nicolet Bay 

Otumba Park 

Percy Johnson 

Portage Park 

2003 

2004 

39 

28 

39 

0 1 

1 0 


2003 

16 

0 0 

2004 

20 

0 0 


2003 

88 

3 0 

2004 

57 

5 1 


2003 

38 

0 0 

2004 

10 

0 0 


2003 

18 

0 0 

2004 

16 

2 0 


2003 

39 

1 0 

2004 

14 

0 0 


2003 16 0 0 

2004 

18 

0 0 


2003 

42 

2 1 

2004 

32 

4 0 


2003 

86 

0 1 

2004 

59 

7 4 


2003 

86 

2 0 

2004 

56 

1 0 


2003 

86 

1 2 

2004 

58 

4 2 


2003 

92 

5 0 

2004 

60 

6 2 


2003 

39 

1 1 

2004 

14 

0 0 


2003 

24 

1 0 

2004 

29 

1 1 


0% 3% 

4% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

3% 0% 

9% 2% 

9% 5% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

13% 0% 

0% 0% 

3% 0% 

0% 0% 

7% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

7% 0% 

5% 2% 

13% 0% 

7% 3% 

0% 1% 

12% 7% 

11% 4% 

2% 0% 

2% 0% 

0% 0% 

1% 2% 

7% 3% 

9% 2% 

5% 0% 

10% 3% 

11% 4% 

3% 3% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

4% 0% 

3% 3% 

18% 6%

Table 1 Continued: E. coli testing May -September, 2003-2005 Door County, WI 

Rock Island 

Sand Dune 

Sandy Bay 

School House 

Sister Bay 

Sturgeon Bay Rec. Canal 

Sunset (Sturgeon Bay) 

Whitefish Bay 

Whitefish Dunes 

2003 

2004 

14 

11 

40 

0 0 

0 0 


2003 

40 

1 0 

2004 

14 

0 0 


2003 

39 

0 0 

2004 

25 

0 0 


2003 

40 

2 0 

2004 

14 

0 0 


2003 

85 

4 0 

2004 

55 

3 1 


2003 

42 

1 0 

2004 

28 

0 0 


2003 

91 

9 1 

2004 

58 

12 1 



2003 

87 

7 2 

2004 

56 

0 1 


0% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

3% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

5% 0% 

0% 0% 

0% 0% 

5% 0% 

5% 2% 

5% 0% 

2% 0% 

0% 0% 

13% 6% 

10% 1% 

21% 2% 

21% 7% 

0% 0% 

8% 2% 

0% 2% 

8% 5%

16% 

14% 

12% 

10% 

8% 

6% 

4% 

2% 

0% 

25% 

20% 

15% 

10% 

Figure 2: E. coli testing May - September 2003-2005 Door County, WI 

Anclam Baileys Clark Egg Harbor Ellison Bay Ephraim Europe Lake Europe Bay 1 Europe Bay 2 Europe Bay 3 Fish Creek Gialison Haines Park 

5% 

0% 

Newport 

St ate Park 

Figure 2 Continued: E. coli testing May -September, 2003-2005 Door County, WI 

Nicolet Bay Otumba Park Percy 

Johnson 

Portage Park Rock Island Sand Dune Sandy Bay School House Sist er Bay Sturgeon Bay Sunset Whit ef ish Whitefish 

Rec. Canal (Sturgeon 

Bay) 

Bay Dunes 

41 

% A dv i sor i es 

% Closure 

% A dv i sor i es 

% Closure

Beach Contamination Source Identification Program 

Primary Responsibility of Door County Soil and Water Conservation Department (SWCD) 

Overall Beach Contamination Source Identification Methodology 

The overall goal of this project is to identify sources of beach pollution so that pollution 

abatement efforts can be effective and efficient. In 2004 and 2005 SWCD used the data 

collected in 2003 to determine the locations for additional water sampling. Water and sand 

samples were taken at various beaches to determine: 

Presence of pathogens (Shigella, Salmonella, Campylobacter); 

Spatial distribution and concentrations of E. coli in beach water, beach sand, and 

storm water; 

E. coli concentrations during and after rain fall events (1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours 

after rain events of at least 0.25 inches within 24 hours); 

Genetic identity of E. coli that was isolated from water samples to determine human 

vs. animal E. coli sources; and 

Antibiotic resistance of E. coli was tested to determine human vs. animal E. coli 

sources. 

Rain data were also collected in proximity of every monitored beach in Door County and an 

Avian Waste Survey was conducted at 11 beaches. Ambient conditions were recorded at the 

time the water sample was taken for beach monitoring (number of birds, weather, wind direction, 

wave height, and water/air temperatures). 

The purpose of collecting ambient conditions at the beach (rainfall, bird populations, and algae 

presence) was to determine which one or combination of these parameters is the most correlated 

to E. coli concentrations at the beach. The purpose of testing the E. coli isolates collected from 

the water and sand samples was to determine whether the source(s) of E. coli found in beach 

waters were from a human source or an animal source. Beach water was tested for pathogens to 

determine the presence of other substances that may have been a threat to human health. 

For this interim beach report statistical analysis was done for all 29 beaches on data collected in 

2004 and 2005 on the following parameters: rainfall from 3 locations in Door County, wind 

direction, wave height, barometric pressure, beach location E. coli distribution, seasonal E. coli 

distribution, and bird populations. E. coli concentrations in beach water during and after rain 

events were analyzed at 11 beaches. Spatial distribution of E. coli in beach sand was analyzed at 

12 beaches. An avian waste survey was conducted at 13 beaches. Data collection and analysis 

was done on: spatial distribution of E. coli at 11 beaches, presence of pathogens at 10 beaches, 

and analysis of E. coli isolates for genetic identity and 20 beaches and antibiotic resistance 

profiles at 9 beaches. E. coli concentrations in storm water pipe systems were determined at 

Otumba Park and Ephraim Beach. These municipalities contributed the funds for storm water 

pipe/system testing, see Appendix A. 

SWCD contracted the University of Wisconsin – Oshkosh Microbiology Department to collect 

and analyze the water samples taken in 2004 and 2005. 

Another component to the source identification project is the data organization and statistical 

analysis. The summary statistics presented in this interim report were obtained from several 

partnering research institutions. Further statistical investigations will be done by recreational 

water quality specialists. The statistical data sets developed in 2005 will be used to determine the 

2006 sampling methods. 

42

Specific Source Identification Methodology and Results 

Impact of Physical Features/Conditions 

Impact of Beach Location 

An analysis of beaches in 2004 and 2005 by location indicated that beaches located in Sturgeon 

Bay (Sunset and Otumba) had significantly higher counts than other beach locations. These 

other locations included, in order of decreasing overall mean E. coli , beaches on Green Bay, 

Lake Michigan, Washington/Rock islands, and inland lakes (Kangaroo, Europe, Clark). The 

inland lake and island beaches grouped together, but all other groups were significantly different 

from one another. The percentage of E. coli concentrations above the advisory level were also 

higher at beaches in Sturgeon Bay, followed by in descending order beaches on Green Bay, Lake 

Michigan, inland lakes and Washington/Rock islands (Figures 3 & 4). 

Figure 3: Mean E. coli count for categories of beaches in 2004. 

Error bars indicate + 1 S.E. (Lake= Anclam, Bailey, Europe, Lakeside, Newport, Portage, Sandy Bay, 

Sturgeon Bay Canal, Whitefish Dunes; Bay= Egg Harbor, Ellison Bay, Ephraim, Fish Creek, Haines, 

Murphy, Nicolet, Otumba, Sister Bay; Inland Lake= Clark, Europe, and Kangaroo Lakes; Island= Gialison, 

Jackson Harbor, Percy Johnson, Rock, Sand Dune and School House; Sturgeon Bay = Otumba, Sunset) 

LogE. coli 

1.50 

1.00 

0.50 

0.00 

 

 

 

1.03 1.39 0.66 0.75 1. 74 

Lake Bay Inland lake Island Sturgeon Bay 

location 

43

E.coli MPN/100mL 

250 

225 

200 

175 

150 

125 

100 

75 

50 

25 

0 

Figure 4: Mean E. coli MPN/100mL by Location in 2005. 

Error bars indicate + 1 S.E. (Lake= Anclam, Bailey, Europe, Lakeside, Newport, Portage, Sandy Bay, 

Sturgeon Bay Canal, Whitefish Dunes; Bay= Egg Harbor, Ellison Bay, Ephraim, Fish Creek, Haines, 

Murphy, Nicolet, Otumba, Sister Bay; Inland Lake= Clark, Europe, and Kangaroo Lakes; Island= Gialison, 

Jackson Harbor, Percy Johnson, Rock, Sand Dune, and School House; Sturgeon Bay= Otumba, Sunset) 

Number of Beaches/Category 

Lake = 12 

Bay = 8 

Island = 6 

Canal =2 

Lake Bay Island 

Beach Location 

Inland Canal 

Seasonal Impact 

In 2004 E. coli counts at Door County beaches generally increased over the course of the 

summer, a pattern seen at many other Lake Michigan beaches. The data was statistically 

smoothed in order to reveal overall patterns and trends. A pattern of gradual buildings and 

dramatic decreases is indicated in the overall mean E. coli counts. This is a pattern not 

commonly seen but that gives evidence of ‘memory’ of E. coli counts. It is generally accepted 

that previous E. coli counts have little relationship to the next day’s count, which is a common 

criticism of the current standards for beach monitoring. The pattern seen at Door County 

beaches is uncommon and it indicates that E. coli counts may build gradually over time, 

sometimes resulting in beach closure events. The percentage of E. coli concentration above the 

advisory level also increased from June to August in 2004 (Figures 5, 6 & 7). 

In 2005 E. coli counts at Door County beaches county-wide over the course of the 

summer were higher in June and July and significantly lower in August. The reason for this 

change in seasonal effect from 2004 to 2005 is not known. 

44

Figure 5: Mean E. coli count for all beaches over the summer 2004. 

Mean Log E. coli 

2.50 

2.00 

1.50 

1.00 

0.50 

0.00 

08/20/04 

08/18/04 

08/16/04 

08/13/04 

08/11/04 

08/09/04 

08/05/04 

08/03/04 

07/31/04 

07/29/04 

07/27/04 

07/23/04 

07/21/04 

07/19/04 

07/15/04 

07/13/04 

07/08/04 

07/06/04 

07/02/04 

06/30/04 

06/28/04 

06/24/04 

06/22/04 

06/18/04 

06/16/04 

06/14/04 

06/12/04 

06/10/04 

06/08/04 

06/04/04 

06/02/04 

05/31/04 

45 

date 

Figure 6: Entire County Mean E. coli MPN/100mL in Beach Water in 2005 


1000 

900 

800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

09/01/04 

08/30/04 

08/26/04 

08/24/04 

5/31/2005 



































Date

Figure 7: Seasonal Countywide Average E. coli MPN/100mL Beach Levels in 2005 

E. coli MPN/100mL 

90.0 

80.0 

70.0 

60.0 

50.0 

40.0 

30.0 

20.0 

10.0 

0.0 

June E.coli Ave July E.coli Ave. 

Month 

August E.coli Ave. 

Spatial E. coli Sampling Methodology 

In 2004 and 2005, samples were taken at several beaches at water depths of 30cm, 60cm, and 

120cm. Spatial sampling across the length of the beach was conducted at the same beaches, and 

there was no difference in site location among left, middle, and right samples at any of the 

beaches. 

Spatial E. coli Sampling Results 

In 2004 and 2005, samples were taken at several beaches at water depths of 30cm, 60cm, and 

120cm. E. coli counts were significantly different at all three depths for Ephraim (2004 only), 

Fish Creek, Otumba, Whitefish Dunes, Anclam, Lakeside, and Sunset (Sturgeon Bay) beaches, 

with the highest counts in shallow (30 cm) of water, and the lowest counts in deep (120 cm) of 

water (Figure 8). These results may suggest that the E. coli originates from the shore and washes 

into beach water. There was no significant difference among depths at Sister Bay, Baileys 

Harbor Ridges Ellison Bay, and Ephraim (2005 only). 

Spatial sampling across the length of the beach was conducted at the same beaches, and there 

was no difference in site location among left, middle, and right samples at any of the beaches 

except for Sister Bay (Figure 9). These results imply that the source of E. coli does not originate 

from one side of the beach versus another. These results may be an indication of how well the 

beach water mixes. 

46

Figure 8: Depth Sampling of E. coli - Door County, WI, 2005. 

Figure 9: Comparison of E. coli counts at center, left, and right at 5 subject beaches in 

2005. 

Error bars indicate + 1 S.E. of the mean. 

Log10 Mean E.coli MPN/100mL 

Log10 Mean E.coli MPN/100mL 

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

1.0 

0.5 

0.0 

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

1.0 

0.5 

0.0 

Anclam Bailey's 

Harbor 

Ridges 

Anclam Bailey's 

Harbor 

Ridges 

Ellison 

bay 

Ellison 

bay 

Ephraim Fish 

Creek 

Ephraim Fish 

Creek 

Lakeside Murphy Nicolet Otumba Sister Bay Sunset Whitefish 

Dunes 

Beach 

47 

cm 30 

cm 60 

cm 120 

Lakeside Murphy Nicolet Otumba Sister Bay Sunset Whitefish 

Dunes 

Beach 

Left 

Center 

Right

Rainfall Quantity Methodology 

Three rainfall locations were selected for analysis for this interim report: Sturgeon Bay, Sister 

Bay, and Egg Harbor. In 2005 rainfall countywide was also compared to E. coli levels collected 

from beach monitoring water samples. 

Rainfall Quantity Results 

There was no significant difference between rainfalls at each location according to a paired 

samples t-test. All three of these locations had similar rainfall daily totals and were highly 

correlated with one another. Although this reveals that rainfall was not driving the high E. coli 

counts for the county as a whole, it is a driving force at individual beaches. E. coli counts at 

beaches and associated storm water outfalls were correlated, and outfalls are affected by rain 

events. Therefore, rainfall likely has an effect on the beaches directly affected by storm water 

outfalls. 

Mean rainfall for each of the three locations was calculated and graphed with mean E. coli count 

for all of the monitored beaches (Figures 10 & 11). There tends to be an increase in E. coli when 

it rains, but there are also increases in E. coli when there is no rain. This indicates that rain is 

one, but not the only, driving factor in high E. coli levels. 

Figure 10: Rainfall at three monitoring stations compared to mean E. coli count 

(log10) at Door County Beaches in 2004. 

Samples from all of the monitored Door County beaches and also mean rainfall for the 

three rain stations was combined. 

Mean rainfall (cm) / Log E. coli(/100CFU) 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

08/11/04 

08/09/04 

08/05/04 

08/03/04 

07/31/04 

07/29/04 

07/27/04 

07/23/04 

07/21/04 

07/19/04 

07/15/04 

07/13/04 

07/08/04 

07/06/04 

07/02/04 

06/30/04 

06/28/04 

06/24/04 

06/22/04 

06/18/04 

06/16/04 

06/14/04 

06/12/04 

06/10/04 

06/08/04 

06/04/04 

06/02/04 

05/31/04 

date 

48 

08/19/04 

08/17/04 

08/15/04 

08/13/04 

Sturgeon Bay rain 

Egg Harbor rain 

Sister Bay rain 

mean rain 

Log E. coli

Figure 11: Rainfall at three monitoring stations compared to mean E. coli count 

(log10) at Door County Beaches in 2005. 

Samples from all of the monitored Door County beaches and also mean rainfall for the 

three rain stations was combined. 


600 

550 

500 

450 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

-50 

-100 

-150 

-200 

-250 

-300 

-350 

-400 








49 

























Date 

E.coli Sturgeon Bay Rain Egg Harbor Rain Sister Bay Rain 

Rainfall conditions 24, 48, and 72 hours before beach monitoring E. coli levels to determine if 

there was a delayed affect of rain on beach water quality. Correlations between E. coli levels 

and rainfall that occurred 24, 48, and/or 72 hours prior to the high E. coli sample may indicate 

that the rainfall has a direct effect and impact on E. coli levels that results in beach advisory E. 

coli levels. 

At Egg Harbor, Ephraim, and Fish Creek beaches there was a correlation between high E. coli 

MPN/100mL of water and rainfall that occurred 24, 48, and 72 hours prior to the high E. coli 

sample (Table 2). At Ellison Bay, Sister Bay, Otumba Park, and Sunset Park beaches there was 

no correlation between high E. coli MPN/100mL of water and rainfall that occurred 24, 48, and 

72 hours prior to the high E. coli sample. At Murphy Park beach there was a correlation between 

high E. coli MPN/100mL of water and rainfall that occurred 24 hours prior to the high E. coli 

sample. At Nicolet Bay beach there was a correlation between high E. coli MPN/100mL of 

water and rainfall that occurred 24 hours prior to the high E. coli sample. 

4 

3.8 

3.6 

3.4 

3.2 

3 

2.8 

2.6 

2.4 

2.2 

2 

1.8 

1.6 

1.4 

1.2 

1 

0.8 

0.6 

0.4 

0.2 

0 

Rainfall (in.)

Table 2: Significant Correlations E. coli MPN vs. 24hrs PPT 2005. 

Beach 

Rainfall 

Hours Prior 

to High E. 

coli 

Sample Correlation Coefficient P-Value 

Egg Harbor 24 0.459 0.000 

48 0.431 0.001 

72 0.35 0.008 

Ellison Bay 24 0.036 0.791 

48 -0.003 0.98 

72 -0.043 0.752 

Ephraim 24 0.671 0.000 

48 0.425 0.001 

72 0.433 0.001 

Fish Creek 24 0.559 0.000 

48 0.588 0.000 

72 0.498 0.000 

Murphy 24 0.299 0.024 

48 0.182 0.175 

72 0.12 0.374 

Nicolet 24 0.395 0.003 

48 0.235 0.085 

72 0.177 0.197 

Sister Bay 24 -0.04 0.769 

48 -0.058 0.668 

72 -0.089 0.509 

Otumba 24 0.105 0.436 

48 0.209 0.119 

72 0.142 0.291 

Sunset 24 0.175 0.188 

48 0.235 0.076 

72 0.168 0.207 

P-value, Alpha les than .05 = significant correlation 

Rain Event Beach Water Sampling Methodology 

E. coli concentrations were measured at Whitefish Dunes, Otumba Park , Fish Creek, Ephraim, 

Sister Bay, Lakeside, Murphy, Egg Harbor, Anclam, Sunset, and Baileys Harbor Ridges beaches 

hourly for 4 hours, and at 8, 12, and 24 hours after various rainfall events of at least .25 inches of 

rain within 24 hours. 

Rain Event Beach Water Sampling Results 

Overall E. coli concentrations were elevated beyond the advisory levels at most sampled beaches 

and beyond the closure level at some sampled beaches within 24 hours of rainfall events of at 

least 0.25 inches (Figures 12-22). 

50

Figure 12: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Anclam beach 2005. 

E. coli MPN 

6400 

6200 

6000 

5800 

5600 

5400 

5200 

5000 

4800 

4600 

4400 

4200 

4000 

3800 

3600 

3400 

3200 

3000 

2800 

2600 

2400 

2200 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 

Sample Hour 

51 





Figure 13: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Baileys Harbor Ridges beach 2005. 

E. coli MPN 

6400 

6200 

6000 

5800 

5600 

5400 

5200 

5000 

4800 

4600 

4400 

4200 

4000 

3800 

3600 

3400 

3200 

3000 

2800 

2600 

2400 

2200 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 

Sample Hour 




8/10/2005

Figure 14: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Egg Harbor beach 2005. 

E. coli MPN 

6400 

6200 

6000 

5800 

5600 

5400 

5200 

5000 

4800 

4600 

4400 

4200 

4000 

3800 

3600 

3400 

3200 

3000 

2800 

2600 

2400 

2200 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 

Sample Hour 

Figure 15: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Ephraim beach 2005. 

E. coli MPN 

6400 

6200 

6000 

5800 

5600 

5400 

5200 

5000 

4800 

4600 

4400 

4200 

4000 

3800 

3600 

3400 

3200 

3000 

2800 

2600 

2400 

2200 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 

Sample Hour 

52 




6/21/2004 

8/18/2004 



Figure 16: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Fish Creek beach 2005. 

E. coli MPN 

6400 

6200 

6000 

5800 

5600 

5400 

5200 

5000 

4800 

4600 

4400 

4200 

4000 

3800 

3600 

3400 

3200 

3000 

2800 

2600 

2400 

2200 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 

Sample Hours 

Figure 17: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Lakeside Park beach 2005. 

E. coli MPN 

25000 

24500 

24000 

23500 

23000 

22500 

22000 

21500 

21000 

20500 

20000 

19500 

19000 

18500 

18000 

17500 

17000 

16500 

16000 

15500 

15000 

14500 

14000 

13500 

13000 

12500 

12000 

11500 

11000 

10500 

10000 

9500 

9000 

8500 

8000 

7500 

7000 

6500 

6000 

5500 

5000 

4500 

4000 

3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

500 

0 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 

Sample Hours 

53 

8/18/2004 


5/31/2004 

8/9/2004 





Figure 18: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Murphy Park beach 2005. 

E. coli MPN 

6400 

6200 

6000 

5800 

5600 

5400 

5200 

5000 

4800 

4600 

4400 

4200 

4000 

3800 

3600 

3400 

3200 

3000 

2800 

2600 

2400 

2200 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 

Sample Hours 

Figure 19: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Otumba Park beach 2005. 

E. coli MPN 

6400 

6200 

6000 

5800 

5600 

5400 

5200 

5000 

4800 

4600 

4400 

4200 

4000 

3800 

3600 

3400 

3200 

3000 

2800 

2600 

2400 

2200 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

54 




1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 

6/12/2004 6/17/2004 7/4/2004 7/4/2004 

Hours 

7/6/2004 7/21/2004 8/24/2004 8/10/2005 8/26/2005

Figure 20: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Sister Bay beach 2005. 

E. coli MPN 

6400 

6200 

6000 

5800 

5600 

5400 

5200 

5000 

4800 

4600 

4400 

4200 

4000 

3800 

3600 

3400 

3200 

3000 

2800 

2600 

2400 

2200 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 

Sample Hours 

Figure 21: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Sunset Park beach 2005. 

E. coli MPN 

6400 

6200 

6000 

5800 

5600 

5400 

5200 

5000 

4800 

4600 

4400 

4200 

4000 

3800 

3600 

3400 

3200 

3000 

2800 

2600 

2400 

2200 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 

Sample Hours 

55 

6/21/2004 


6/12/2004 

6/17/2004 

7/4/2004 

7/6/2004 

7/21/2004 



Figure 22: Rain Event E. coli MPN/100mL of water Whitefish Dunes beach 2005. 

E. coli MPN 

6400 

6200 

6000 

5800 

5600 

5400 

5200 

5000 

4800 

4600 

4400 

4200 

4000 

3800 

3600 

3400 

3200 

3000 

2800 

2600 

2400 

2200 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 

Sample Hours 

56 

5/31/2004 



The Door County Public Health Department will be requiring several beaches in Door County to 

post beach swimming advisory signs on the beach after .25 inches of rain has fallen within 24 

hours. The “Wet Weather Beach Swimming Advisories” are required when a beach has either 

of the following E. coli counts recorded during rainfall beach water monitoring events by the 

Door County Soil and Water Conservation Department. 

1. A minimum of 100% of the rain event beach water samples for E. coli exceed the closure 

level (1,000 MPN/100mL of water) during more than 1 sampled rain event, OR 

2. A minimum of 80% of the rain event beach water samples for E. coli exceed the advisory E. 

coli level of 235 MPN/100mL of water in a minimum of 3 sampled rain events. 

Wet Weather Beach Swimming Advisories will be required by the Door County Public Health 

Department for Fish Creek beach, Murphy County Park, Anclam Park, Ephraim beach, Lakeside 

Park, Sunset Park (Sturgeon Bay), and Otumba Park (Table 3). Swimming advisories will be 

required at these beaches in 2006 because all of these beaches had either a minimum of 100% of 

the rain event beach water samples for E. coli exceed the closure level (1,000MPN/100mL of 

water) during more than 1 sampled rain event, OR a minimum of 80% of the rain event beach 

water samples for E. coli exceed the advisory E. coli level of 235MPN/100mL of water in a 

minimum of 3 sampled rain events. The specifications for posting a Wet Weather Beach 

Swimming Advisory will be given to beach managers by mid May 2006 for the 2006 swimming 

season. 

Egg Harbor, Sister Bay, and Whitefish Dunes State Park beaches will not be required to post 

swimming advisory signs after rain events because they did not meet the minimum criteria 

(Table 3). However, all three beaches have had E. coli levels exceed the advisory or closure 

level during rain event sampling so posting swimming advisories for 24 hours after ¼ of rain 

within 24 hours is encouraged.

Table 3: Wet Weather Beach Swimming Advisories Determination 

% E. coli 

above 

advisory 

% E. coli 

above 

closure 

57 

Required Wet 

Weather Beach 

Swimming Advisory 

Beach 

# of sampled 

rain events 

Sister Bay 2 100% 50% Not required at this time yes 

Fish Creek 2 100% 100% Required yes 

Egg Harbor 3 66% 33% Not required at this time yes 

Murphy Park 

Whitefish 

3 100% 67% Required yes 

Dunes 3 30% 0% Not required at this time yes 

Anclam Park 4 100% 75% Required yes 

Ephraim 

Baileys Harbor 


Ridges 4 50% 25% Not required at this time yes 

Lakeside Park 6 83% 67% Required yes 

Sunset Park 7 86% 29% Required yes 

Otumba Park 

E. coli Levels: 


Advisory = 235 MPN/100mL of 

water 

Closure = 1,000 MPN/100mL of water 

Recommend 

further rain event 

sampling 

The rain event results indicate that the presence of a storm water outfall and/or a stream outlet in 

close proximity to a beach may cause a significant increase in E. coli concentrations. Impervious 

runoff areas can also be considered part of water delivery systems to the beach. For example 

areas of curbed streets that drain storm water to a parking lot and or boat launch near the beach 

or bay. See Appendix A for E. coli testing methodology and results for storm water pipes and 

catch basins, and streams near Otumba Park beach in Sturgeon Bay and Ephraim Beach. 

Wind Methodology 

In 2004 comparison among beaches indicated that wind direction influenced E. coli counts at 

beaches on the Green Bay side of the peninsula. Specifically, counts were lower during an 

offshore wind (p

Table 4: Mean E. coli in beach water on the Green Bay side of Door County in various 

wind conditions in 2004. 

BAY N Subset for alpha=0.05 

offshore 101 1.1184 

1 2 

barrier 51 1.4069 

alongshore 54 1.4324 

onshore 167 1.5196 

Significance 1.000 0.648 

In 2005 comparisons were made between beaches to determine if there were correlations 

between E. coli levels and wind at individual beaches. Significant correlations were found 

between wind and high E. coli levels at Sunset Park (Sturgeon Bay), Europe Bay Town Park 

Sample site #1, Sturgeon Bay Recreational Canal Area, Otumba Park, Ellison Bay, Egg Harbor, 

Ephraim, Nicolet, Sister Bay, and Portage Park (Table 5). The E. coli levels at each of these 

beaches reacted differently to various wind directions and types. Wind directions were classified 

into wind types at each beach based on if the wind was an onshore, offshore, long shore and 

barrier (wind block). 

The beaches listed in Table 5 have a significant (alpha=0.05) differences in E. coli 

concentrations with respect to wind direction based in a T-Test. No analysis for Gialison, 

Jackson Harbor, Schoolhouse, Sand Dune, Rock Island, and Percy Johnson due to insufficient 

data. If a beach is not listed, there was no significant difference in E. coli with respect to wind 

direction. In the “Difference Found” column the statements mean that the wind direction listed 

has a statistically significant relationship with elevated E. coli. 

58

Table 5: T-Test Correlation between Door County Beach Water Samples E. coli 

MPN/100mL of water and Wind Direction/Type 

Beach Difference Found p value 

Sunset N-S greater than NE-E-SE 0.030 

Wind Type Barrier > offshore 

Europe 1 NE-E-SE greater than SW-W-N 0.011 

Wind Type Onshore > long/offshore 

Sturgeon Bay Rec. Canal NE-SW greater than E-SE-S 0.050 

Wind Type Long shore > onshore 

Otumba E greater than N-NE-NW 0.002 

E greater than W 0.026 

Wind Type Long shore> onshore/barrier 

Ellison E-W-NW greater than S-SW 0.050 

Wind Type Barrier > onshore 

Egg Harbor N-SW greater than E-S 0.035 

NE-E-NW greater than E-S 0.009 

NE-E-NW greater than N-SW 0.001 

Wind Type 

Ephraim N-W-NW greater than E-SE-S 0.006 

NE-SW greater than E-SE-S 0.006 

Wind Type Long/onshore > offshore 

Nicolet N-NE-E greater than S-SW-W 0.002 

Wind Type Onshore > offshore 

Sister Bay N-W-NW greater than E-SE-S-SW 0.008 

Wind Type Onshore > offshore 

Portage N-S greater than SW-W-NW 0.024 

N-S greater than NE-E-S 0.050 

Wind Type Long shore > onshore/offshore 

Wave Height Methodology 

In 2004 and 2005 wave height was measured by the samplers monitoring beaches for E. coli and 

in 2004 by the NOAA-operated buoy located in Lake Michigan near the northeastern tip of the 

Door County peninsula. 

Wave Height Results 

In 2004 wave height was positively correlated with E. coli counts at all beaches (R=0.234, 

p

Table 6: Correlation between Wave Height and E. coli Levels in 2005 

Beach 

Correlation 

Coefficient 

P- 

Value 

Baileys Harbor 

Ridges 0.26 0.051 

Newport State Park 0.343 0.01 

Portage Park 0.381 0.029 

Egg Harbor 0.575 0.000 

Fish Creek 0.638 0.000 

Sunset (Sturgeon 

Bay) 0.278 0.034 

Gialison Beach 0.621 0.018 

Rock Island 0.694 0.006 

E. coli Concentrations in Beach Sand 

Sand Sampling Methodology 

Beach sands were sampled above the swash zone, in the swash zone and in 6 and 12 inches in 

water to determine E. coli levels. Three replicate samples were taken in each sample location. 

Sunset (Sturgeon Bay), Otumba, Baileys Harbor Ridges, Ephraim, Fish Creek, and Whitefish 

Dunes beach sands were sampled weekly in 2005. Anclam, Lakeside, Murphy, Nicolet, Ellison 

Bay, Sister Bay and beach sands were sampled once in June and once in August in 2005. 

Sand Sampling Results 

Preliminary results indicate that levels of E. coli in the sand are relatively low. The following 

beaches had at least one sand sample in which the E. coli levels were above the beach water 

monitoring advisory level (235MPN/100mL): Sunset, Baileys Harbor Ridges, Otumba, Fish 

Creek, Ephraim, Whitefish Dunes, Lakeside and Murphy beaches (Figures 23-34). The E. coli 

levels in sand samples taken from Anclam, Nicolet, Ellison Bay and Sister Bay beaches were all 

below the beach water monitoring advisory level (235MPN/100mL). Additional work is being 

done in 2006 to determine the source of E. coli in sand. 

Figure 23: Sunset Park Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. 

E.coli CFU/g 

1000 

900 

800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

Week 1 

Week 2 

Week 3 

Week 4 

Week 5 

Week 6 

Week 7 

Week 8 

Week 9 

Week 10 

Week 11 

Week 12 

Time 

Upshore Swash Wet MPN 

60 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

E.coli MPN/100mL

Figure 24: Baileys Harbor Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. 

E.coli CFU/g 

1000 

900 

800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

Week 1 

Week 2 

Week 3 

Week 4 

Week 6 

Week 7 

Week 8 

Week 9 

Week 10 

Week 11 

Week 12 

Figure 25: Otumba Park Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. 

E.coli CFU/g 

Time 

Figure 26: Fish Creek Beach Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. 

E.coli CFU/g 

1000 

900 

800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

1000 

900 

800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

Week 1 

Week 2 

Week 1 

Week 2 

Upshore Swash Wet MPN/100mL 

Week 3 

Week 4 

Week 5 

Week 6 

Week 7 

Time 

Week 8 

Week 9 

Week 10 

Week 11 

Week 12 


Week 3 

Week 4 

Week 5 

Week 6 

Week 7 

Time 

Week 8 

Week 9 

Week 10 

Week 11 

Week 12 


61 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

2600 

2400 

2200 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 



E.coli MPN/100mL

Figure 27: Ephraim Beach Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. 

E.coli CFU/g 

1000 

900 

800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

Week 1 

Week 2 

Week 3 

Week 4 

Week 5 

Week 6 

Week 7 

Time 

Week 8 

Week 9 

Week 10 

Week 11 

Week 12 


Figure 28: Whitefish Dunes State Park Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. 

1000 

900 

800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

Week 1 

Week 2 

Week 3 

Week 4 

Week 5 

Week 6 

Week 7 

Week 8 

Week 9 

Week 10 

Week 11 

Week 12 

Figure 29: Anclam Park Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. 

CFU/g 

E.coli CFU/g 

1000 

950 

900 

850 

800 

750 

700 

650 

600 

550 

500 

450 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

June 

upshore 

August 

upshore 

Time 


June swash August 

swash 

Sand Sample Locations 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 


62 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 


June wet August wet June 

special 

E.coli CFU/g E.coli MPN/100mL June E.coli MPN/100mL August 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

E.coli MPN/100mL

Figure 30: Lakeside Park Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. 

CFU/g 

Figure 31: Murphy Park Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. 

CFU/g 

1000 

950 

900 

850 

800 

750 

700 

650 

600 

550 

500 

450 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

June upshore August 

upshore 


swash 


Figure 32: Nicolet Bay Beach Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. 

CFU/g 

1000 

950 

900 

850 

800 

750 

700 

650 

600 

550 

500 

450 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

1000 

950 

900 

850 

800 

750 

700 

650 

600 

550 

500 

450 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 


upshore 


upshore 

63 

June wet August wet 



swash 




swash 





2600 

2400 

2200 

2000 

1800 

1600 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

MPN/100mL 

MPN/100mL 

MPN/100mL

Figure 33: Ellison Bay Beach Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. 

CFU/g 

Figure 34: Sister Bay Park Sand E. coli Levels vs. Water E. coli Levels 2005. 

CFU/g 

1000 

950 

900 

850 

800 

750 

700 

650 

600 

550 

500 

450 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

1000 

950 

900 

850 

800 

750 

700 

650 

600 

550 

500 

450 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 


upshore 


upshore 


swash 




swash 



Impact of Biological Factors 

Biological factors were examined for their effect on E. coli concentrations at all monitored 

beaches including the number of gulls, amount of gull waste and algal mass present at the time of 

the water sampling. 

Bird Count Methodology 

The total number of birds was recorded at the time of water sampling for the beach monitoring 

program in 2004 and 2005. 

Avian Waste Survey Methodology 

The avian waste survey determined the number and percentage of bird waste, dropping, at 12 of 

the beaches that were monitored for E. coli, including Whitefish Dunes, Fish Creek, Egg Harbor, 

Murphy Park, Sunset, Otumba, Sister Bay, Ephraim, Portage Park, Ellison Bay and Newport 

State Park. The survey was conducted to determine the potential for avian waste to be a source 

of E. coli contamination on the beach. 

64 



40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

MPN/100mL 

MPN/100mL

Using the bird count method alone does not account for the birds that are present at the beach 

when the samplers are not there. Bird waste is a source of E. coli, so counting the waste is 

another way to determine the potential for the waste to be a significant source of E. coli at each 

of the surveyed beaches. In comparing the bird count and bird waste survey results there are 

different beaches that show up as having the largest bird populations, indicating that the 

combination of both surveys is needed to determine the most accurate populations. 

Avian waste was counted in nine 4’ X 4’ plots, 150 feet apart, in a transect area of 1/4 mile by 4’ 

adjacent to the swash zone (shoreline). The avian waste counts where extrapolated to determine 

waste counts per transect area. Survey data does not represent the total amount of bird waste on 

the beach. The use of the same transect size allows the amount of avian waste to be compared 

between beaches (Figure 35). 

Figure 35: Example of Avian Waste Survey transect and sample plot areas in Otumba Park 

Beach 

Red Polygon represent the transect area and the green squares represent the sample plots. 

Bird Count and Avian Waste Survey Results 

Overall, gulls accounted for the majority of the birds at each beach. The influence of gull 

presence was quite pronounced at several beaches and was significantly correlated with E. coli 

counts in the water (R 2 =0.365). Correlation between numbers of gulls and E. coli counts are 

often difficult to find, although it is widely suspected that gulls are directly influencing bacterial 

counts (Figure 35). In 2004 Pearson Correlations show a correlation between avian waste 

amounts and E. coli at Ephraim and Newport beaches, indicating that as the amount of avian 

waste increased E. coli concentrations also increased (Table 7). There were strong correlations 

between bird count numbers and E. coli concentrations at Ellison Bay Otumba Park, and 

Whitefish Dunes State Park beaches, and a moderate correlation at Sister Bay beach, indicating 

that as the number of birds counted is related to E. coli concentrations. 

65

Beach 

In 2005 Pearson Correlations show no correlations between avian waste amounts and E. coli in 

beach water samples, indicating that as the amount of avian waste may have no effect on E. coli 

concentrations (Table 8). There were strong correlations between bird count numbers and E. coli 

concentrations at Egg Harbor beach, and a moderate correlation at Whitefish Dunes beach, 

indicating that as the number of birds counted is related to E. coli concentrations. 

Table 7: Pearson Correlation of Avian Waste, Bird Counts, and E. coli Levels in 2004. 

(Alpha 0.05) 

Avian Waste 

vs. Bird 

Counts 

Avian Waste 

vs. Bird 

Counts - 

p-value 

Avian 

Waste 

vs. E. 

coli 

Avian 

Waste vs. 

E. coli - 

p-value 

66 

Bird 

Count 

vs. E. 

coli 

Bird Count 

vs. E. coli 

- pvalue 

Notes 

Baileys 

Harbor 0.138 0.745 -0.365 0.374 -0.434 0.282 High bird levels. 

Egg Harbor -0.191 0.574 0.521 0.100 -0.149 0.662 

Ellison Bay 0.063 0.871 0.043 0.913 0.880 0.002 

Ephraim 0.563 0.090 -0.135 0.711 -0.117 0.748 

Fish Creek 0.000 1.000 -0.216 0.524 -0.057 0.868 

Newport 0.853 0.003 -0.166 0.670 -0.036 0.927 

Otumba 0.229 0.474 -0.184 0.567 0.695 0.012 

Sister Bay 0.103 0.778 -0.008 0.982 0.478 0.162 

Sunset 

Whitefish 

-0.255 0.424 0.505 0.094 -0.045 0.891 

Dunes 0.129 0.397 -0.172 0.259 0.345 0.02 

Avian Waste is total waste counted per 144 ft 2 

Good to Excellent Correlation 

Moderate Correlation 

Beach 

Higher goose 

levels. 

Table 8: Pearson Correlation of Avian Waste, Bird Counts, and E. coli Levels in 2005. 

(Alpha 0.05) 

Avian Waste 

vs. Bird 

Counts 

Avian Waste 

vs. Bird 

Counts - 

p-value 

Avian 

Waste 

vs. E. 

coli 

Avian 

Waste vs. 

E. coli - 

p-value 

Bird 

Count 

vs. E. 

coli 

Higher goose and 

duck levels. 

Mostly Gull waste. 

High levels. 

Bird Count 

vs. E. coli 

- pvalue 

Mean Log E. coli 

Baileys 

Harbor 0.263 0.364 -0.025 0.933 -0.127 0.666 1.48 

Egg Harbor -0.216 0.459 -0.105 0.732 0.535 0.059 1.81 

Ellison Bay -0.248 0.392 -0.069 0.814 -0.257 0.376 1.77 

Ephraim 0.224 0.441 0.173 0.555 0.023 0.937 1.76 

Fish Creek -0.127 0.665 -0.126 0.668 -0.292 0.312 2.18 

Murphy -0.104 0.724 -0.135 0.659 -0.025 0.935 2.05 

Newport Na an an na 0.379 0.224 1.2 

Nicolet 0.081 0.783 0.056 0.856 -0.241 0.428 2.05 

Otumba -0.235 0.419 -0.217 0.477 0.133 0.665 2.17 

Portage 0.066 0.822 0.203 0.700 -0.654 0.159 2.34 

Sister Bay 0.289 0.317 -0.284 0.326 -0.180 0.538 1.62 

Sunset 

Whitefish 

-0.118 0.689 -0.174 0.571 -0.277 0.36 2.39 

Dunes 0.124 0.673 -0.170 0.579 0.590 0.034 2.13

Avian Waste is total waste counted per 144 ft 2 

Good to Excellent Correlation 

Moderate Correlation 

Algae Impact Study Methodology 

Cladophora is a natural alga that is native to Wisconsin. It grows attached to rocks on the lake 

bottom. When it detaches, either from wave action or die off it washes up onto beaches and 

decays (Figure 36). As Cladophora washes up on the beach it also brings a variety of other 

aquatic vegetation and zebra mussels that have detached from rocks and become entangled in the 

algae. On the beach the decaying algae provides shade and carbohydrates that may promote the 

growth of E. coli. 

Figure 36: Cladophora glomerata structure 

A Cladophora distribution survey was conducted at all 28 beaches monitored for E. coli in Door 

County. The distribution was determined at the time of water sample collection for beach 

monitoring. The survey methods were developed by the Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources. The water samplers rated the amount of Cladophora at the beach based on the 

following scale: 

None Cladophora not present anywhere on the beach. 

Low Cladophora minimally present in patches on the beach. 

Moderate Cladophora noticeably present on the beach and a nuisance. 

67

High Cladophora covers beach in wind rows. 

Water samples for E. coli MPN/10mL of water were taken in 2005 in and around Cladophora 

mats at as a preliminary study to determine the amount of E. coli that is in and around the algae 

mats at the beach and the potential for E. coli to wash off the mats and result in elevated E. coli 

levels in beach water samples. 

Algae Impact Study Results 

There are many other species of aquatic plants that are typically in Cladophora mats. The 

quantity of these species was not determined. In Table 9 the general distribution of algae on the 

beaches is summarized by grouping the observations into two categories: none to low and 

moderate to high. The percentage of none to low algae group occurred more than 60% of the 

time at 10 beaches. The moderate to high group occurred at 13 beaches more than 60% of the 

time. At the remaining 5 beaches both groups occurred about equally. Overall this indicates that 

there is a potential for Cladophora mats to impact beach water at several beaches. 

Table 9: Cladophora Distribution Survey Percentages of Total Samples 

Beach none-low med-high 

Anclam 40 60 

Baileys 34 66 

Clark 100 0 

Egg 47 53 

Ellison 72 28 

Ephraim 32 68 

Europe1 25 75 

Europe2 36 64 

Europe3 44 56 

Europe Lake 79 21 

Fish Creek 33 67 

Gialison 70 30 

Haines 31 69 

Jackson Harbor 86 14 

Kangaroo Lake 94 6 

Lakeside 28 72 

Murphy 64 36 

Newport 54 46 

Nicolet 37 63 

Otumba 27 73 

Percy 71 29 

Portage 41 59 

Rock 45 55 

Sand Dunes 42 58 

Sandy Bay 60 40 

68

School 100 0 

SturRecCanal 40 60 

Sister Bay 9 91 

Sunset 13 87 

Whitefish 64 36 

In 2005 a summary of relationships between Cladophora observations and E. coli levels were 

made at beaches during summer 2005 (Table 10). Cladophora observations were put at 0=none, 

1=low, 2=moderate, and 3=high (per DNR suggestions and visual chart). Actual E. coli 

monitoring data was used. Linear regression analysis was utilized to arrive at F and p values. 

Egg Harbor was the only location where there was a correlation between Cladophora levels and 

E. coli levels. 

Table 10: Summary of relationships between Cladophora observations and E. coli levels at 

beaches during summer 2005. 

Beach F value P value 

Anclam 0.156 0.695 

Bailey’s Harbor 0.681 0.413 

Egg Harbor 6.621 0.013 

Ellison 0.114 0.737 

Ephraim 1.572 0.215 

Europe 1 0.002 0.969 

Europe 2 0.002 0.969 

Europe 3 0.491 0.487 

Fish Creek 0.071 0.791 

Gialison 0.397 0.541 

Haines 1.367 0.247 

Jackson Harbor Ridges 0.016 0.900 

Lakeside 0.022 0.884 

Murphy 2.192 0.144 

Newport 0.036 0.850 

Nicolet 3.281 0.076 

Otumba 0.002 0.962 

Percy Johnson 3.041 0.109 

Portage Park 0.156 0.696 

Rock Island 0.234 0.637 

Sand Dune 0.042 0.840 

Sandy Bay 1.382 0.252 

Schoolhouse 0.009 0.926 

Sister Bay 1.855 0.179 

Sturgeon Bay Rec. Canal 0.037 0.848 

Sunset 0.016 0.901 

Whitefish Bay 1.869 0.177 

Whitefish Dunes 0.319 0.575 

The preliminary study showed that E. coli concentrations were relatively high in the Cladophora 

mats at all four beaches and it was high around the mats at beaches (Figures 36-39). 

69

Figure 37: Lakeside Park 2005 E. coli samples in Cladophora Mats. 


2500 

2000 

Date 

1500 

1000 

500 

0 


10M Lft of Mat 

10M Rt of Mat 

10M Away 

5M Lft of Mat 

5M Rt of Mat 

5M Away 

Figure 38: Murphy Park 2005 E. coli samples in Cladophora Mats. 

1M Lft of Mat 

1M Rt of Mat 

1M Away 

Mat Proper 

10M Lft of Mat 10M Rt of Mat 10M Away 5M Lft of Mat 5M Rt of Mat 

5M Away 1M Lft of Mat 1M Rt of Mat 1M Away Mat Proper 


2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

500 

0 

1/1/1900 

1/2/1900 

Date 

1/3/1900 

1/4/1900 

1/5/1900 

1/6/1900 

1/7/1900 

Mat Proper 

1M Away 

1M Rt of Mat 

1M Lft of Mat 

5M Away 

5M Rt of Mat 

5M Lft of Mat 

10M Away 

10M Rt of Mat 


10M Lft of Mat 10M Rt of Mat 10M Away 5M Lft of Mat 5M Rt of Mat 

5M Away 1M Lft of Mat 1M Rt of Mat 1M Away Mat Proper 

70

Figure 39: Whitefish Dunes State Park 2005 E. coli samples in Cladophora Mats. 


2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

500 

0 







10M Away 

10m Rt of Mat 


Mat Proper 

1M Away 

1m Rt of Mat 

1m Lt of mat 

5m Away 

5m Rt of M at 

5M Lft of Mat 

Figure 40: Anclam Park 2005 E. coli samples in Cladophora Mats. 


Date of Sample 

71 

Mat Location 

10M Lft of Mat 10m Rt of Mat 10M Away 5M Lft of Mat 5m Rt of Mat 

5m Away 1m Lt of mat 1m Rt of Mat 1M Away Mat Proper 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

500 

0 


Date 



10M Away 

10M Rt of Mat 


5M Away 

5M Rtof Mat 

5M Lft of Mat 

Mat Proper 

1M Away 

1M Rt of Mat 

1M Lft of Mat 

Sample Location 

10M Lft of Mat 10M Rt of Mat 10M Away 5M Lft of Mat 5M Rtof Mat 

5M Away 1M Lft of Mat 1M Rt of Mat 1M Away Mat Proper

Further Study on Impacts of Algae at the Beach 

Starting in 2007 there will be a three year study done around the Great Lakes by a partnership of 

University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh, University of Minnesota, and the United States Geologic 

Survey to determine the impacts of Cladophora mats on E. coli concentrations in beach water. 

There will be several beaches in Door County that will be included in this study. 

Pathogen Presence - Methodology 

The beach waters of Sunset (Sturgeon Bay), Nicolet, Murphy, Ellison Bay, Baileys Harbor, 

Ephraim, Fish Creek, Otumba, Sister Bay and Whitefish Dunes beaches were monitored weekly 

for pathogens which commonly cause gastrointestinal (GI) tract disease in humans. Water 

samples were collected in the center of the beach in 24 inches of water and analyzed for 

Salmonella, Shigella, and Campylobacter. 

Pathogen Presence - Results 

The beach waters of Sunset (Sturgeon Bay); Nicolet, Murphy, Ellison Bay, Baileys Harbor, 

Ephraim, Fish Creek, Otumba, Sister Bay, and Whitefish Dunes beaches were monitored weekly 

for pathogens which commonly cause GI tract disease in humans. Water samples were collected 

in the center of the beach in 24 inches of water and analyzed for Salmonella, Shigella, and 

Campylobacter. Salmonella and Shigella were not detected at any of the beaches. 

Campylobacter was detected at Otumba Park Beach in 69% of the samples in 2004 and 36% in 

2005. In 2005 Campylobacter was found at Sunset Park (Sturgeon Bay) in 42%, Ellison Bay in 

33%, Murphy Park 25%, and Nicolet Bay Beach in 25% of the samples (Table 11). There was 

no correlation between detection of Campylobacter and elevated E. coli concentrations in water 

samples. Campylobacter comes from a variety of sources, including birds, humans, and cattle. 

Campylobacter that was found did not match any of the known human, bovine, or poultry 

strains. Additional testing to determine the specific source of Campylobacter needs to be done. 

Additional water samples for pathogens do not need to be taken at Ephraim, Fish Creek, Sister 

Bay, Baileys Harbor Ridges, or Whitefish Dunes beaches unless a problem arises 

Table 11: Pathogens detected from five selected beaches in Door County during summer 

2004 and 2005. 

ND= not detected from any sample for the entire summer. TNTC= too numerous to count. 

Beach Salmonella Shigella Campylobacter E. coli 

Ephraim 

2004 

Fish Creek 

2004 

Otumba Park 

2004 & 2005 

ND ND ND 

ND ND ND 

6/10/2004 ND ND Low 

6/17/2004 ND ND Moderate 365.4/100ml 

6/24/2004 ND ND Moderate 13.4/100ml 

7/8/2004 ND ND TNTC 79.6/100ml 

7/15/2004 ND ND TNTC 27.1/100 ml 

7/22/2004 ND ND TNTC 406.7/100 l 

7/29/2004 ND ND TNTC 52.1/100 ml 

8/11/2004 ND ND TNTC 88.4/100 ml 

8/26/2004 ND ND TNTC 35.5/100 ml 

6/28/2005 ND ND TNTC 859.1/100ml 



72


8/23/2005 ND ND TNTC 99/100ml 

Sister Bay 

2004 

ND ND ND 

Whitefish 

Dunes 2004 

Baileys 

Harbor 

Ridges 2005 

Ellison Bay 

2005 

ND ND ND 

ND ND ND 

6/14/2005 ND ND 4.7 9.7/100ml 

7/5/2005 ND ND 4 151.5/100ml 



Murphy 

Park 2005 

ND ND 1.33 8.6/100ml 




Nicolet 

Beach 

2005 

ND ND TNTC 24/100ml 

ND ND 

2419.2/100m 


TNTC 

l 



Sunset 

(Sturgeon 

Bay) 2005 

ND ND 5.33 6.3/100ml 


6/21/2005 ND ND 2.33 706/100ml 



ND ND 

1365.7/100m 


11.67 l 

Determining the Identity of E. coli Contaminating Door County Beaches 

E. coli isolates were collected from beach water samples at Baileys Harbor Ridges, Ellison Bay, 

Ephraim, Fish Creek, Murphy Park, Nicolet, Otumba, Sister Bay, Sunset (Sturgeon Bay), and 

Whitefish Dunes beaches and were used for determining the identity of the E. coli. The goals in 

identifying E. coli found on these beaches were to determine if the E. coli was from a human or 

animal (avian, dog, cattle) source. E. coli is commonly used as in indicator of beach 

contamination because it is associated with fecal material. The common threat to swimmer’s 

health comes from the pathogens and other toxins that are commonly found in waters with high 

E. coli concentrations, not the E. coli itself. The use of both antibiotic resistance and genetic 

fingerprinting tests increases the overall validity of the results. 

E. coli Identity Methodology 

Both tests require the recovery of E. coli isolates from solid fecal samples and beach water 

samples. Throughout the summer, E. coli isolates were recovered from fecal matter collected 

from the beaches, human samples from wastewater treatment facilities. Water isolates were 

recovered from E. coli positive wells in the Quanti-trays throughout the summer (Figure 40). A 

total of 1300+ E. coli isolates were recovered 

73

Antibiotic Resistance Methodology 

E. coli from human sources typically has a higher resistance to the majority of the antibiotics 

because humans have been subjected to a larger quantity and variety of these antibiotics. If the 

E. coli has a low resistance to the antibiotics the source is usually not human. Other potential 

non human sources of E. coli include birds, dogs, cattle, deer and other animals depending on the 

beach location. Quanti-Trays with positive fluorescence for E. coli were pierced in the back and 

a 10µl lapful of organism was extracted and plated on EMB agar. Isolates were confirmed as E. 

coli, by traditional biochemical testing and the API 20E. 

Figure 41: Quanti-Trays with positive 

fluorescence for E. coli 

Antibiotic resistance testing was done on E. coli recovered from Ephraim, Fish Creek, Sister 

Bay, Otumba Park (Sturgeon Bay), and Whitefish Dunes State Park. Two methods were used to 

look at the antibiotic resistance of E. coli isolates. One method utilized 16 different antibiotics 

and the classic Kirby-Bauer antibiotic sensitivity testing techniques to determine antibiotic 

resistance and sensitivity (Table 12). 

74

Table 12: Antibiotics used for antibiotic resistance testing of E. coli isolates and their 

concentrations. 

Antibiotic Concentration (µg/ml) 

Ampicillin 10µg 

Augmentin 30µg 

Cephalothin 30µg 

Ciprofloxacin 5µg 

Erythromycin 15µg 

Gentimycin 10µg 

Kanamycin 30µg 

Nalidixic Acid 30µg 

Novobiocin 5µg 

Polymyxin B 300 U* 

Streptomycin 10µg 

Sulfasoxizole 0.25 mg 

Tetracycline 30µg 

Trimethoprim 5µg 

Tobrmycin 10µg 

Vancomycin 30µg 

*Note: Polymyxin B is measured in International Units. 

The second method of testing antibiotic resistance used a replica plating method that used the 

well established methods by Kaspar and Pareveen in a 48 pin microplate replicator (Table 13). 

Statistical analysis was done to compare between categories using a test of binomial proportion 

(alpha = 0.05) to determine the antibiotic resistance of the E. coli. 

Table 13: Antibiotics used in replica plating technique and their concentration. 

Antibiotic concentration (µg/ml) 

Ampicillin 20 

Augmentin 25 Amoxicillin + 5 

Clavulanic acid 

Chlorotetracycline 25 

Ciprofloxacin 5 

Kanamycin 50 

Nalidixic Acid 25 

Neomycin 50 

Oxytetracycline 25 

Penicillin 90 U* 

Streptomycin 12.5 

Sulfathiazole 2000 

Tetracycline 25 

*Note: Penicillin is measured in International Units. 

Genetic Fingerprinting Methodology 

Genetic fingerprinting was done on E. coli recovered from Baileys Harbor Ridges, Ellison Bay, 

Ephraim, Fish Creek, Murphy Park, Nicolet, Otumba, Sister Bay, Sunset (Sturgeon Bay), and 

Whitefish Dunes State Park. Repetitive element PCR (using the BOXA1R primer) was used to 

obtain DNA fingerprints of E. coli obtained from water samples as well as from avian and 

75

human waste samples. Fingerprints were imaged using instrumentation housed in the NSF / 

Robert E. Moore Functional Genomics Core Facility at UW Oshkosh. 

The DNA fingerprints were analyzed by grouping similar genetic codes and comparing them to a 

database of genetic codes from the solid fecal samples taken from humans, gulls, geese, ducks, 

dogs, and deer in Door County. E. coli isolates that were recovered from a beach water samples 

were matched to the genetic codes from the various solid waste samples to determine the genetic 

identity of the E. coli isolate. For example, if the genetic code from an E. coli isolate collected 

from beach water was statistically similar to the genetic code of the E. coli isolates from human 

waste samples the E. coli isolate is considered to be from a human source. The frequency and 

size of groupings of similar genetic codes where analyzed to determine the overall presence of 

both human and avian E. coli sources at each of the beaches. The groupings were constructed by 

calculating the Dice similarity coefficients and constructing cladograms using the Unweighted 

Pair Group Method with Arithmetic Mean (UPGMA). 

Source Identification E. coli Identity - Results/Conclusions 

Overall the level of human resistance to the antibiotics was lower in the E. coli isolates from 

Door County than it has been in other similar studies in more urban areas. This is expected 

because smaller population bodies have overall lower resistance to the large variety of antibiotics 

used in the test. 

In 2004 the antibiotic resistance testing and the genetic fingerprinting indicate that the largest 

contributing source of E. coli at Whitefish Dunes beach is from avian sources, primarily gulls. 

In 2004 and 2005 Baileys Harbor Ridges, Ellison Bay, Ephraim, Fish Creek, Murphy Park, 

Nicolet, Otumba, Sister Bay, and Sunset (Sturgeon Bay), both tests reveal that E. coli at these 

beaches are coming from human, avian and other animal sources (Figure 41). Since human E. 

coli was found to be a source for a portion of the beach contamination at these beaches additional 

sampling and genetic analysis needs to be done in 2006 to identify the specific locations of these 

sources. Additional samples should be taken in storm water outfall pipes, streams and runoff 

channels that outlet in proximity to the beach. 

Figure 42: Genetic Groupings of E. coli Isolates MANOVA Results by Beach 

AP 

BH 

E 

EB 

EH 

FC 

HW 

LP 

MP 

NB 

NI 

O 

OR 

PP 

SB 

SP 

SS 

SU 

SW 

WF 

76

Beach Contamination Source Identification Methods 

Recommendations 

The methods that are used for beach contamination source identification in 2006 will depend on 

the final statistical results on the 2003-2005 beach data. These results will assist in determining 

the refinements and additional work that needs to be done in the beach contamination source 

identification project. 

Portions of the data collected in 2004-2005 needs to be replicated and further focused on 2006 to 

account for the effects of weather patterns, water levels, and bird populations. Replication will 

also determine the strength of the 2004-2005 results and provide more data that can be applied to 

creating a baseline for Door County surface water quality. 

The physical characterizations of each beach are used for determining the best water sample 

locations and statistical correlative work. The characterizations will also be useful for predictive 

modeling work. 

Recent research indicates that Cladophora algae are a medium for E. coli bacteria growth on the 

beach. Further work needs to be done in this area to determine the potential for Cladophora to 

be a contributing source of E. coli at Door County beaches. 

Primary focus for 2006 beach project will be on rain event E. coli sampling and collecting 

additional samples include water samples for E. coli levels at locations that were determined to 

be statistically significant potential sources of contamination; and phosphorus, turbidity, and 

basic water quality parameters at a variety of Door County beaches. Overall recommendations 

for future beach contamination source identification: 

Collect water samples for E. coli concentrations and recover E. coli isolates for genetic 

analysis from storm water and stream outfalls during rain events. These isolates and 

concentrations of E. coli can be compared to beach levels and beach-recovered isolates. 

Conduct spatial sampling of Cladophora mats to determine effects on E. coli levels as 

these masses migrate along the shoreline, moving along and in and out of beach waters. 

Recover E. coli isolates to determine if bacteria multiply in beach areas 

Continue collection of E. coli isolates for genetic analysis in areas/times with known high 

E. coli. Recover E. coli isolates from the beach water and sand at selected locations 

before and after storm events, during windy conditions, and in runoff channels. 

Expand the post-rainfall sampling to look at levels of E. coli being washed from 

impervious surfaces and land masses in close proximity to the beaches. Complete data 

sets for beaches studied in 2004 and expand the post-rainfall sampling to other beach 

locations. 

Conduct spatial sand sampling in runoff channels on beaches with impervious surface 

runoff. 

Discontinue detection of Salmonella and Shigella at beaches that have already been tested 

for these pathogens, unless there is a specific reason to continue at a specific beach. 

Continue Campylobacter detection in water and in fecal material of both avian species 

and humans. Monitor for pathogens at beaches that have not been monitored for 

pathogens. 

77

General Beach Management Recommendations 

• Post wet weather swimming advisory signs and avoid swimming at beaches after rain 

events of ¼ inch in 24 hours. 

• Consider options for reducing storm water runoff to all monitored beaches with storm 

water pipes and or runoff areas. 

• Place signs that ask and activity instruct beach goers not to feed the birds at all of the 

monitored beaches. 

• Inform the public about the potential impact of runoff, dog/pet feces, and impacts of 

feeding birds on water quality. 

78

Appendix A: Storm water Conveyance Systems as a Source 

of E. coli in Beach Water – Otumba Park and Ephraim Beach 

Prepared by the University of Wisconsin – Oshkosh Biology and Microbiology Department 

Otumba Park Beach 

Method: 

During the summer of 2005 a rain gauge located within 2 miles of each beach was utilized to 

measure rainfall. A rainfall event reaching between 0.2-0.3 inches of rain within a 24 hour 

period was considered to be “significant”. When the gauge recorded a “significant rainfall event” 

it would automatically call a cell phone alerting samplers. Samples would then be collected at 

designated pipes, storm sewer basins, and streams. The samples were collected either with an 

extended pole with an attached sterile whirl-pak bag or directly into a sterile 100 ml bottle. After 

the samples were collected they were stored in a cooler with ice until processing in the 

laboratory. Sampling for storm sewer basins occurred once for each rain event, approximately 

one hour after the samplers were alerted. During some rain events some sites were dry at the 

time of sampling. 

Sampling of discharge from storm water pipes or streams emptying at beaches occurred at 1, 2, 

and 3 hours after the samplers were alerted. In addition, beach water (24 inch depth, center of 

beach) was monitored for E. coli concentrations at 1,2,3,4,8,12, and 24 hours after samplers were 

alerted of a significant rainfall event. 

Results: 

1. Otumba Park Beach and Surrounds: E. coli in Storm water Conveyance Systems 

Storm water conveyance systems around Otumba Park Beach (Sturgeon Bay) were investigated 

as a contributor to E. coli contamination of beach water. Samples were collected between May 

31, 2005 and August 27, 2005. There were a total of four significant rain events during this time. 

Sampling Site 1 (storm water basin) located at the end of Juniper St. near the beach access area 

(See Map) was identified as a “control site” to be sampled throughout the summer during periods 

of no rain. This site was sampled five times during non-rain times. The average E. coli 

concentration found at Site 1 during non-rain periods was 1143.1/100 ml water. These values 

varied widely, however, with detected E. coli concentrations ranging from 131 E. coli /100 ml 

water to 4611 E. coli /100 ml water. In addition, Sampling Site 1 was sampled during two rain 

events (July 28 and August 9, 2005). During rain the average E. coli concentration found at Site 

1 was 585 E. coli /100 ml water. This suggests that this storm water basin is a potential source 

of E. coli contamination of beach water. 

Sampling Sites 2, 3, and 4 (storm water basins) were sampled only during rain events. Site 2 is 

located on the corner of Locust and Kendale St., Site 3 is on Hudson near Maple, and Site 4 is on 

Hudson near Oak (See Map). Sites 2, 3, and 4 averaged 10,051, 658, and 1881 E. coli /100 ml 

water, respectively, during rain events (See Figure 15). Sites 3 and 4 are located approximately 

one block apart, with Site 4 further south along Hudson St. It appears that E. coli is entering the 

storm water pipes somewhere south of our sampling area and is being diluted as rain enters the 

system on its way to empty into the beach. 

Site 2, the site with the greatest average E. coli concentration (10X greater than the upper limit 

for E. coli in beach water), was dry during two of the sampled rain events and had a relatively 

low E. coli concentration (239 E. coli /100 ml water) during the July 28, 2005 sampling. 

79

Without further sampling at this site, it is difficult to determine if it truly is a significant source 

of E. coli in beach water. 

Two additional sites (storm water discharge pipes) were sampled at Otumba Park Beach during 

rain events. These sites have been designated P1 (west side of beach) and P2 (east side of 

beach). Discharge pipes were sampled one, two, and three hours after samplers were alerted of a 

significant rainfall event. Pipes only contained storm water discharge on August 9 and 27. Both 

pipes discharged storm water with over 2000 E. coli /100 ml water at all time points. For P1, E. 

coli concentrations rose from 4290 to 7780 E. coli /100 ml water during the three hour sampling 

period. At P2, E. coli discharge rose, from 2365 to 3610 E. coli /100 ml water in the first two 

hours then fell slightly to 2191 E. coli /100 ml water by the third hour. This represents a 

substantial amount of E. coli entering beach water. 

E. coli concentrations in beach water also were elevated following rainfall events, but timing of 

this increase in beach water was dependent on rainfall amounts and rates. For example, on 

August 27, 2005 beach water E. coli was measured at 988 E. coli /100 ml water at the first hour 

sampling, elevated slightly at the second and third hour and began to decline until it reached 85 

E. coli /100 ml water by 24 hours post alert. On this day P1 and P2 discharged 3165 and 1498 E. 

coli /100 ml water, respectively, at the first hour sampling. On August 11, 2005, however, storm 

water basins at Sites 3 and 4 averaged over 1700 E. coli /100 ml water at the first hour sampling 

and P1 and P2 were dry for the first three hours post alert. E. coli concentration in beach water 

remained low (< 200 E. coli /100 ml water) for the first four hours of sampling. At 8 hours post 

alert E. coli concentration in beach water rose to 2359 E. coli /100 ml water and did not drop 

substantially until the 24 hour sample. 

It appears that relatively high levels of E. coli enter the storm water conveyance system around 

Otumba Park before or during rainfall events, and is washed into beach water at Otumba Park 

Beach at some time point after a significant rainfall event. Results from genetic testing indicate 

that the E.coli in the conveyance system is not predominately human, or avian. However, there 

were some groupings of isolates that are yet to be determined. These isolates may be of an 

origin that is not represented in the database, such as dog or cat. While the source of this E. coli 

has not yet been conclusively determined, it is clear that this conveyance system does play some 

role in the E. coli found at the beach. In fact, while large groups can not be genetically matched, 

some beach water isolates have matched very closely to those isolates recovered from the 

conveyance system. Mitigating this source of E. coli may prove helpful in elucidating ways to 

avoid contamination of this local beach. 

80

Figure 43: Otumba Park Storm Water Conveyance Sample Results 2005 

E. coli (MPN/100 ml water) 

4000 

3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

500 

0 

Ephraim Beach 

Methods: 

4611 4900 19,863 

5/31/2005 6/15/2005 7/7/2005 7/19/2005 7/28/2005 8/9/2005 8/11/2005 8/26/2005 8/27/2005 

)Site 1 (non-rainfall )Site 1 (rainfall Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 

During the summer of 2005 a rain gauge located within 2 miles of each beach was utilized to 

measure rainfall. A rainfall event reaching between 0.2-0.3 inches of rain within a 24 hour 

period was considered to be “significant”. When the gauge recorded a “significant rainfall event” 

it would automatically call a cell phone alerting samplers. Samples would then be collected at 

designated pipes, storm sewer basins, and streams. The samples were collected either with an 

extended pole with an attached sterile whirl-pak bag or directly into a sterile 100 ml bottle. After 

the samples were collected they were stored in a cooler with ice until processing in the 

laboratory. Sampling for storm sewer basins occurred once for each rain event, approximately 

one hour after the samplers were alerted. During some rain events some sites were dry at the 

time of sampling. 

Sampling of discharge from storm water pipes or streams emptying at beaches occurred at 1, 2, 

and 3 hours after the samplers were alerted. In addition, beach water (24 inch depth, center of 

beach) was monitored for E. coli concentrations at 1,2,3,4,8,12, and 24 hours after samplers were 

alerted of a significant rainfall event. 

Town of Ephraim Beach and Surrounds: E. coli in Storm water Conveyance Systems 

Storm water conveyance systems around the Town of Ephraim Beach were investigated as a 

contributor to the E. coli contamination of beach water. Samples were collected between June 8, 

2005 and August 11, 2005. There were a total of four significant rain events during this time. 

Sites 1-5 are stream channels around Town of Ephraim Beach that empty into the beach area. 

Site 6 is storm water catch basin located on the south side of Hwy 42 near Site 4. Average E. 

coli concentrations for Sites 1-5 ranged from 59.9 to 1231 E. col/100 ml water when samples 

81

were collected 1 hour after samplers were alerted of a significant rainfall event (See Figure 15). 

Site 3 was dry for three of the sampling events and had a relatively low E. coli concentration (75 

E. coli /100 ml water) during the one rain event when storm water is flowing at this site. This 

site is located in Brookside Creek at the dead end of Brookside Lane, and does not appear to be a 

significant contributor to E. coli contamination at the Ephraim beach. Likewise, Site 2 (In 

stream channel of Hidden Springs, on south side of Larsen Lane, east of Hidden Spring Road) 

averaged 59.9 E. coli /100 ml water, and does not appear to contribute to E. coli contamination 

of the beach. 

Sites 1(In stream channel just south of the culvert pipe along the south side of Larson Lane 

where the stream crosses Larson Lane), 4 (In stream channel on the south side of Hwy 42, just 

east of the eastern border of the public beach property line, stream flows under road into culvert 

pipe. The sample was taken 5 feet above the area where the storm water outlet (concrete pipe) 

joins the stream), and 5 (In stream channel Hidden Springs, on south side of Hwy 42, Northeast 

of Hidden Spring Road) are located closer to the beach than the other stream locations and 

appear to contribute more to E. coli contamination of the beach water. Site 6 (a storm water 

catch basin) also is located close to the beach and near Site 4. It had a moderate average E. coli 

concentration (236 E. coli /100 ml water). Genetic analysis did not show that the majority of the 

isolates were human or avian in nature and there were no distinct groupings indicating a mixed 

source of E. coli. Additional analysis of genetic results will compare beach water isolates with 

those recovered from the conveyance system. 

When beach water E. coli concentrations are examined over the 24 hours following a significant 

rainfall event, it appears that concentrations consistently elevate within one to four hours and 

then decline to very low levels by 24 hours post rainfall. How fast E. coli concentrations rise or 

how elevated they become depends on amount and rate of rainfall. It should be noted that the 

2005 beach season was relatively dry, and that trends in E. coli concentrations could change in a 

wet year. 

Figure 44: Ephraim Storm Water Conveyance Sample Results 2005 

4000 


3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

500 

0 

6/8/2005 7/28/2005 8/9/2005 8/11/2005 

Date 

82 

Site 1 

Site 2 

Site 3 

Site 4 

Site 5 

Site 6

Appendix B: Watershed Study – Bay Shore Property 

Association Summer 2005 

Prepared by: Colleen McDermott, D.V.M., Ph.D., Professor of Microbiology, Dept. Biology and 

Microbiology, Halsey Science Center, University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, Oshkosh, WI 54901 

It has been a pleasure to complete a second year of working with the Bay Shore Property 

Owners’ Association on water quality testing in Door County, WI. Our laboratory measured 

coliform and E. coli concentrations in over 175 water samples collected by hard-working, 

dedicated volunteers, living along Bay shore Drive during summer 2005. Sampling began in 

mid-June (6/13/2005) and continued twice per week until the end of August (8/29/2005). 

Samples were collected from beach water with a depth of 24 inches (approximately 6-12” below 

the surface) at seven residences along Bay shore Drive and Laurie Lane and from a culvert 

located between 5979 and 5783 Bay shore Drive. The residences are spaced approximately two 

miles apart, with the northern most address being 6675 Bay shore Drive and the southern most 

address being 4227 Bay shore Drive. Public beaches close to these properties that were 

monitored as part of the county monitoring effort include Frank Murphy Park to the north and 

Sunset Park, Sturgeon Bay to the south. 

Table 1 shows the E. coli concentrations measured from water at the seven residences and at the 

culvert by date. This table represents a correction of the data previously distributed by the Bay 

Shore Property Owners group during the September 30, 2005 meeting. You will notice that 

average E. coli concentrations from the residences was slightly higher for June than for July or 

August, although there was a small spike in concentrations detected in mid-July. The attached 

figures also show these same data in a slightly different form. Figure 1 shows the seasonal 

average E. coli concentration for each address and for the culvert. Figures 2-9 show the E. coli 

concentrations separately for each beach by date. Once again, the culvert had the highest E. coli 

concentrations, with a seasonal average E. coli concentration of over 600 MPN/100 ml water 

(2004 seasonal average for the culvert was 284 E. coli /100 ml water). 

For beach water monitoring, two excedence points have been established by the State of 

Wisconsin. If E. coli concentration exceeds 235 organisms/100 ml water, a poor water quality 

advisory is issued. If E. coli concentration exceeds 1000 organisms/100 ml water, the beach is 

closed. Table 2 compares the number of excedences detected along Bay shore Drive and in 

water from the culvert during summer 2004 and 2005. While there is little difference in 

excedence percentages at the residences (per water sample taken) between the two years, the E. 

coli concentration of water from the culvert appears to have substantially increased in summer 

2005. The number of excedences detected for the residences is not significantly different from 

those measured at the public beaches throughout Door County, and should be considered a 

measure of good water quality. The number of excedences detected from water from the culvert 

is disturbing. 

As was discussed at the September 30, 2005 meeting, monitoring beach water for E. coli 

concentration is important for determining baseline levels of microbes in the environment and 

for protecting public health if E. coli concentrations are elevated. Monitoring does not, however, 

determine a source of the microbial contamination when/if it occurs. 

Source tracking of microbial contamination can be accomplished by many different mechanisms. 

Spatial sampling along shorelines, depth sampling, pathogen detection in water, and E. coli 

isolation with DNA fingerprinting, all are methods that our laboratory has utilized at public 

beaches in Door County. Likewise, we have isolated, enumerated and fingerprinted E. coli from 

beach sand and from Cladophora mats at these public beaches, also to attempt to track the source 

83

of microbial contamination. I highly recommend that the Bay shore Property Owners Group 

participate in some sort of source tracking investigation in summer 2006. The culvert as a source 

of contamination is a likely first step, followed by simple spatial or depth sampling. Depending 

on finances, additional testing could be undertaken. Measurement of Cladophora mats and 

correlation with E. coli concentrations in water is a low cost possibility that may shed light on a 

source of microbial contamination. Measurement of environmental parameters (wind speed, 

wind direction, wave height, etc.) at the time of sampling is another. 

Our laboratory has agreed to act as a fiscal agent for the Bay Shore Property Owners to 

allow the group to receive funding from a Lakeshore Natural Resources Partnership grant. We 

are pleased to be continuing our relationship with your organization and look forward to 

planning for summer 2006. 

Table 14: Comparison of E. coli concentrations exceeding safe swimming standards in 

2004 and 2005. Asterisks indicate substantial increase in 2005 compared to 2004. 

2004 2005 

Total Culvert Residences Total Culvert Residences 

Tests 

Tests 

# Tests 96 12 72 176 19 157 

# >235 

MPN 

5 2 3 14 9 5 

% > 235 

MPN 

5.2% 16.7% 4.2% 8.0% 47.4%* 3.2% 

# >1000 

MPN 

1 1 0 6 4 2 

% > 1000 

MPN 

1.0% 8.3% 0% 3.4% 21.1%* 1.3% 

Figure 45: Bay Shore Property Association Watershed Study Summer 2005 

Average E. coli (MPN/100 ml water) 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

6675 5979 5783 Culvert 5573 4998 4575 Laurie 4227 

Sample Location 

84

2005 - Door County Web Map

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?