Wildlife Habitats May Pollute Popular Beaches

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Researchers expected that Talbert Marsh, a manmade saltwater wildlife habitat, would help keep the water near Huntington Beach in California clean; such wetlands are thought to purify contaminants as they flow out into the ocean. But in fact, the marsh¿and its residents¿may be doing the exact opposite. A new study appearing in the June 15 issue of Environmental Science & Technology reveals that droppings from the marsh's seagulls are at least one major source of potentially hazardous bacteria that has been hitting the beach¿sometimes at levels thousands of times above the legal limit.

Stanley Grant of the University of California at Irvine and his colleagues tested the waters near Huntington Beach at more than a dozen sites, finding many instances of elevated enterococci bacteria levels. They also discovered that millions of gallons of bird droppings, flushed regularly from Talbert Marsh, can travel to the Pacific Ocean within less than 40 minutes¿leaving little time for saltwater and sunlight to kill the bacteria. "We have to be smarter about how we build these marshes," says Mark Sobsey of the University of North Carolina. "If they are designed so that the water goes through them very rapidly, the chances are pretty high that you'll have the same kinds of problems."

Grant notes that about 4.6 million saltwater marshes in the continental U.S. may be affected. "One scenario is that anywhere along the coast in the United States, you might run into this problem," he says. "We thought there were multiple sources for the bacteria at Huntington Beach. What we've found is that the marsh is one of those sources. This beach is ground zero of what could be a national problem."

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe