Report on Backcountry water quality

[DougPaul]

A report on the quality of backcountry water: http://www.latimes.com/travel/outdoors/la-os-giardia26jul26,0,4844133.story?coll=la-home-outdoors

One conclusion: water from the top few inches of a lake is safer than stream water. UV in sunlight tends to sterilize the upper water.

Doug

 

[grouseking]

This is a neat article....and to quote part of it...

"The reality is that poor personal hygiene, not contaminated water, "is to blame for people getting sick in the backcountry," says Gregg Fauth, wilderness manager for Sequoia and Kings Canyon national parks. Diarrhea-causing bugs, such as giardia and its cousin, Cryptosporidium, two parasites that live in the intestines of animals and humans, are transmitted through fecal matter — primarily by people who don't practice good sanitary habits, such as washing their hands or properly disposing of their feces, which should be buried at least 10 feet away from the water."

Yet I still feel concerned about not bringing a filter and will never drink out of a stream without one. Am I just too paranoid??

grouseking

 

[DougPaul]

primarily by people who don't practice good sanitary habits, such as washing their hands or properly disposing of their feces, which should be buried at least 10 feet away from the water."

There is a correction that it should have said 100--200 ft.

Yet I still feel concerned about not bringing a filter and will never drink out of a stream without one. Am I just too paranoid??

Maybe, maybe not... Pathogens in the water are a risk, but the exact risk is unknown. I know of no good studies done in the NE mtns.

Doug

 

[grouseking]

Maybe, maybe not... Pathogens in the water are a risk, but the exact risk is unknown. I know of no good studies done in the NE mtns.

Doug

I would think that the heavy use area in New England would put us in a much higher risk then maybe a larger area like out in California, but then again I've never been there before.

I think thats what makes me the most paranoid....the heavy use of a relatively small area, even in the wilderness regions.

Phil

 

[Grumpy]

"The reality is that poor personal hygiene, not contaminated water, "is to blame for people getting sick in the backcountry," says Gregg Fauth, wilderness manager for Sequoia and Kings Canyon national parks. Diarrhea-causing bugs, such as giardia and its cousin, Cryptosporidium, two parasites that live in the intestines of animals and humans, are transmitted through fecal matter — primarily by people who don't practice good sanitary habits, such as washing their hands or properly disposing of their feces, which should be buried at least 10 feet away from the water."

I found something in this that was rather contradictory. Didn't you?

The premise is that hikers cause their own problems. I don't doubt it happens, and often. But is that always the case?

The part about washing hands is OK. But what about that feces disposal business? Isn't that something we who practice perfectly good personal hygiene but who come after Pigpen Charlie have to worry about? Pigpen's inept feces disposal practices will affect not only him, but will leave things contaminated for us, too. And we might not even realize it until too late.

SoI 'll probably continue to filter in areas that receive any appreciable amount of hiker traffic, just to be on the safe side.

G.

 

[DougPaul]

I think thats what makes me the most paranoid....the heavy use of a relatively small area, even in the wilderness regions.

LIkely, but it would be nice to see some real data. If the risk were 1/1000000 per trip without treatment and 1/100000 with (a factor of 10 greater), 1/100000 is still small compared to one's total risk profile. But if the risks were 1/1000 and 1/100, then 1/100 might be a significant fraction of one's total risk.

And of course, the risk would vary--for instance it would be higher after a heavy rain or during sping runoff due to water flowing directly from the land surface into the streams.

Doug

 

[Kevin Rooney]

I've discovered there's a strong sentiment in the Sierra Nevada hiking community that water-borne giardia and cryptosporidium infections are unlikely, and that the most common source of infection is poor hygiene. I've seen several people dip their Nalgenes directly into a stream, or make the point 'the water's safe to drink about point X because there are no campsites above it'.

I'm not sure what the actual risk level is. I know that for myself I try to practice good hygiene but I still filter all my water. What I do take some consolation in is the knowledge that if in an emergency I had to drink unfiltered water my chances of infection are probably slight.

 

[DougPaul]

The premise is that hikers cause their own problems. I don't doubt it happens, and often. But is that always the case?

The part about washing hands is OK. But what about that feces disposal business? Isn't that something we who practice perfectly good personal hygiene but who come after Pigpen Charlie have to worry about? Pigpen's inept feces disposal practices will affect not only him, but will leave things contaminated for us, too. And we might not even realize it until too late.

If we assume that human feces are the source of the pathogens, the question is which is the higher probability path for transmission: 1) feces, hand, mouth or 2) feces, ground surface water, stream/lake, mouth. The data appears to indicate that path 1 is the higher risk. And path 1 is easily interrupted by washing one's hands. Path 1 still seems to be a higher risk path including that some percentage of people wash their hands.

Doug

 

[Papa Bear]

If we assume that human feces are the source of the pathogens, the question is which is the higher probability path for transmission: 1) feces, hand, mouth or 2) feces, ground surface water, stream/lake, mouth. The data appears to indicate that path 1 is the higher risk. And path 1 is easily interrupted by washing one's hands. Path 1 still seems to be a higher risk path including that some percentage of people wash their hands.

Doug

Wait a minute. How can #1 be a problem as stated? How can you catch a bug from your own feces if you don't have the bug (yet). You have to get it from someone else, you can't get it from yourself. So the problem is person 1 gets it on his hands and touches something that perrson 2 consumes.

So you need to restate #1

1) feces to hand to something to someone else's mouth.
or
1) their feces to their hands to something to your mouth

Washing your hands won't help you (but it might help them). Having them wash their hands will help you (but is largely out of your control).

Solutions: hike solo; Don't let anyone touch your stuff; never touch their stuff.

"Care for some M&Ms?" "No thanks."


Something that always made me wonder, if all the folks who go into the back country start out without the bug (a good assumption since Guardia is totally dibillitating. You just can't have it and not know, i.e. you can't be asymptomatic). How does any one's hygene have anying thing to do with it?

So I think the analysis has a fundamentyal logical gap. I think it's likely that there is a reservoir of the organism in the wild (I'v heard deer can carry it) and humans pick it up once and a while (from bad water) - then they can pass it on (from bad hygene). This would be the Ebola model.

Solution: kill off all the deer .

 

[Papa Bear]

Feces is loaded with "bugs", including yours ...Urine is sterile, unless you have a kidney or bladder infection, or something along those lines.

I didn't suggest that feces are sterile. Of course they're loaded with bugs, all yours. In other words you can't catch something from yourself unless you already have it.

Seriously, that's why some folks who are worried about the safety of blood used for transfusions, will "stockpile" a quantity of their own blood before undergoing a scheduled surgery.

 

[DougPaul]

Wait a minute. How can #1 be a problem as stated? How can you catch a bug from your own feces if you don't have the bug (yet). You have to get it from someone else, you can't get it from yourself. So the problem is person 1 gets it on his hands and touches something that perrson 2 consumes.

So you need to restate #1

1) feces to hand to something to someone else's mouth.
or
1) their feces to their hands to something to your mouth

<maximum sarcasm> Gimmie a break!!!! <maximum sarcasm off>
The standard assumption is for transmission between two different hosts.

BTW, you can transmit problems from yourself to yourself--consider pathogens from your feces getting in your eyes. Or if you get a perforated bowel, you will infect your abdominal cavity.

Washing your hands won't help you (but it might help them). They washinng their hands will help you (but is largely out of your control).

Depends. 1) You can get pathogens on your hands from touching objects (other hands, door handles, etc) and, if you do not wash them off, can get them in your mouth and/or into your food. 2) Someone else has pathogens on their hands, and if they do not wash, can get them on your hands, food, or somthing that you might touch.

So the safest course is to wash your hands 1) after using the toilet, 2) before preparing food, and 3) before eating. Just like your mother told you when you were a kid... If you wish, you can add 4) after touching anything (including another human) which might be contaminated.

"Care for some M&Ms?" "No thanks."

Multiple hands dipping into a food bowl/bag is a good method for transmitting pathogens.

Something that always made me wonder, if all the folks who go into the back country start out without the bug (a good assumption since Guardia is totally dibillitating. You can not have it and not know). How does any one's hygene pass it on to anyone else?

Wrong--some people are asymptomatic carriers. And reactions vary from none to debilitating. Furthermore, there is a delay between exposure and symptoms.

So I think the analysis has a fundamentyal logical gap. I think it's more likely that there is a reservoir of the organism in the wild (I'v heard deer can carry it) and humans pick it up once and a while (from bad water) - then they can pass it on (from bad hygene). This would be the Ebola model.

Other species other than humans can be infected or be carriers. But humans and their pets carry them rapidly across wide distances and inject them into the local environment.

Solution: kill off all the deer .

And the humans and their pets. Or at least don't let them off their home territories. (Take it easy here folks--this is not a personal remark.)

Get used to it--there are pathogens all around us. The low tech approach of washing one's hands gives a significant amount of protection. One cannot control what others do, but one can protect one's self to a signifcant degree.

Doug

 

[DougPaul]

Feces is loaded with "bugs", including yours ...Urine is sterile, unless you have a kidney or bladder infection, or something along those lines.

Correct.

The problem with urine is that it is a good growth medium.

Doug

 

[DougPaul]

I knew that E. Coli and other bugs were already present in the feces of many mammals, but apparently Giardia isn't one of those...

If the animal in question is infected with Giardia, Giardia cysts will be shed in its feces.

Doug

 

[TCD]

I use a filter as a precaution, but it has been fairly well publicized for some years that poor hiker hygiene is quite likely a more frequent cause of illness. So I wash my hands, too.

Good note about the communal M&M bag or bowl! My rule has always been: "Pour, don't paw."

TCD

 

[Grumpy]

...

... some people are asymptomatic carriers. And reactions vary from none to debilitating. Furthermore, there is a delay between exposure and symptoms.

Other species other than humans can be infected or be carriers. But humans and their pets carry them rapidly across wide distances and inject them into the local environment.

...

Get used to it--there are pathogens all around us. The low tech approach of washing one's hands gives a significant amount of protection. One cannot control what others do, but one can protect one's self to a signifcant degree.

It is quite correct to note that some (many) giardia carriers are asymptomatic, and that people and animals are capable of spreading cooties across a wide area in fairly short order, and that pathogens are all around us. You have to wonder how many of those, "I drink untreated water and never get sick" guys are just asymptomatic vectors.

The first trick to protecting yourself from the unseen -- and we are discussing the unseen here -- is to assume that your surroundings may be a source of contamination. Then you take appropriate precautions.

"Surroundings" include your companions, as well as things like the ground, the front riser on your leanto, and water sourceea. Handwashing is a way to avoid becoming contaminated by ingestion from having touched something; not sharing gorp is a good way to avoid becoming contaminated by something that may have been touched.

Water is a "found" thing in hiker surroundings that we not only touch but actually ingest, so it makes sense to be cautious about it -- filter or otherwise treat to avoid becoming contaminated and infected.

That's the only point I make in discussions like this.

BTW, I've known several people who have been "symptomatic" with giardiasis, and they tell me it is no fun at all. I'll take their word for it and appropriate precautions, hoping never to have the experience first-hand.

G.

 

[Oldsmores]

Touch everything, never wash your hands, build up your immune system (or possibly die, which is a drastic solution to the problem).
Yeah, I know, this isn't a solution for parasites. Personally, I filter my water in most places in the Northeast while moaning about the good old days when I didn't worry about it. Let's face it, it's not THAT hard to carry a filter and use it. If you choose not to you might get a miserable case of Montezuma's revenge, which isn't likely to damage you severely or permanently...

 

[Mad Townie]

Though I suspect this is NOT true for Giardia, I do know that E. coli live in our colons (hence, "coli") but can still give us problems if we ingest them. They belong in our lower GI tract, not in our upper GI tract.

So yes, we can have problems from our own feces through our own unwashed hands. But that still doesn't address the Giardia issue.

 

[DougPaul]

BTW, I've known several people who have been "symptomatic" with giardiasis, and they tell me it is no fun at all. I'll take their word for it and appropriate precautions, hoping never to have the experience first-hand.

I've had it. Wasn't much fun.

Almost certainly got it from other people. (Wasn't even drinking "outdoor" water at the time.) Took about a week for initial symptoms to show up, then it came in waves at intervals of about a week. Don't know how typical my symptoms were--just know that I don't want to repeat the experience.

Doug

 

[Lawn Sale]

I’ve seen this article before and have raised questions about it in the past.

The first problem is with the method, but perhaps they’re using an analytical method that’s so new it’s still in the testing phase. I only mention this from the passage,

“His routine is virtually the same at each of the sites where he takes samples: He snaps on a pair of blue latex gloves to avoid contamination and then skims a plastic test tube along the surface of the water, collecting just enough to fill the 2-inch rectangular container, which he stores neatly in an ice chest that he stows in his SUV. He dips a thermometer in the water, and then jots down the time, water temperature and altitude on a log to record each visit. The samples will be taken back to his laboratory at UC Davis and tested for such bugs as giardia.”

I have been taking Giardia samples for many years, and the minimum sample volume is 10 liters (yes, about 2.5 gallons). Also, the collected sample cannot be stored for more than a day before analysis, and even in those cases it must be chilled to between 1° and 10° C. Neglection of these items would naturally result in a much lower, if any, result in the proper enumeration of Giardia, thus invalidating the results.

Water is fluid, meaning it moves. It is subject to time, temperature, external interferences, movement, and a whole collection of other factors that can sustain or inhibit organisms. As a result one day you can have perfectly clean water and the next contaminated, or vise versa. Simply testing one point on one day, or even a range of days, has little meaning in the overall criteria of whether or not it’s safe.

To say it’s some conspiracy from filter manufacturers is ludicrous, that never should have even made it to print.

To say the top of the lake has less bacteria is simply inaccurate. Floating debris, wave action, and thermal currents produce a layer of bacteria typically a few inches thick, which is why lake sampling protocols for bacteria require you to sample beneath the surface. If anything you should drink the water 6” to 12” below the surface, but even that can have little to no effect. It’s true that the UV will cleanse the water, but UV light is easily blocked by external interferences, and it doesn’t take much to create a large shadow.

It’s also true most cases are caused by non-water contact with contaminated material. But that’s not to say water should be ruled out as a source of contamination.

It amazes me that articles like this are printed. And the junk science that goes along with it should be prohibited from even being collected, no matter how many letters are after the sampler’s name. I don’t mean to sound annoyed, but this borders on negligence, at least in my eyes. You will never hear me telling people to use a filter, they have a choice on the risk they’re willing to take. Most people I know, once they have the facts, choose to purify, but not all, and most have never gotten sick. But, to err on the side of caution is prudence, to tell people the risks are false or exaggerated is just irresponsible.