Environment Hamilton

[SteelTown]

Have you guys noticed the air is a lot cleaner and no haze since Stelco shut down operate? I believe Dofasco slowed down production.

I remember some report saying the air has been like 40% cleaner than this time last year. I believe we've only had 1 smog day so far. Last year I think we pretty much had smog everyday during the summer.

It's really nice to go at the top of the Escarpment and see across the Lake.

It's pretty shocking and surprising what a difference it makes when Stelco shuts down for our local Environment.

[Blurr]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Have you guys noticed the air is a lot cleaner and no haze since Stelco shut down operate? I believe Dofasco slowed down production.

I remember some report saying the air has been like 40% cleaner than this time last year. I believe we've only had 1 smog day so far. Last year I think we pretty much had smog everyday during the summer.

It's really nice to go at the top of the Escarpment and see across the Lake.

It's pretty shocking and surprising what a difference it makes when Stelco shuts down for our local Environment.

Right on.

Coming from out of town the two major insults of Hamilton I have experienced are.

1. So much pollution!

2. Abandoned downtown and weirdos!

And lets be serious, the image Hamilton has is very important.

To solve point #1. Make the air in the city cleaner than Toronto's (go away stelco, clean up the water front) and start promoting it. Or even better, make it the cleanest in Ontario and make a slogan "Hamilton, cleanest air among cities in Ontario"

2. Run LRT through King, right in the heart of downtown, and watch and promote investment in the area. The people walking around will change, and abandoned buildings will become vibrant.

Hamilton's image has to improve to get the kind of investment it has been waiting for so many years.

[SteelTown]

It was just an observation. Didn't mean to poke around Hamilton's image problem.

I find it surprising the immediate effect closing operation at Stelco can do to Hamilton's local environment. You can really notice it when you jog and walk up and down the stairs.

[FairHamilton]

I think if anything it's a combination of the steel mill closures/slow down and the unusually cool (no humidity) summer, so far. Not one, or the other, but both.

[lucasmascotto]

Beached: 20 years later, swimming still too risky at Hamilton’s bayfront parks
Birds and human activity are to blame for high levels of E. coli
CBC News
By: Matt Moir

A twenty-year effort to improve water quality at Hamilton's waterfront parks has failed to make the park's beaches any safer for swimming.

Most years, the beaches at Pier 4 and Bayfront Parks are posted as unsafe for swimming half of every summer — more often than when they opened in the early 1990s.

Dangerously high levels of e-coli bacteria are the reason. And despite the best efforts of the City of Hamilton and other environmental stakeholders, few signs of significant improvement are in sight.

Since 2010 city water inspectors have deemed Bayfront beach and Pier 4 beach safe to swim in just 48 per cent of the time, according to figures supplied to CBC News by the city's Public Health department, and that trend has continued thus far this year.

As of August 16, Bayfront beach had been closed 45 days this season due to unacceptably high levels of E. coli. The smaller Pier 4 beach had been closed seven times, a good result for the year, but not part of an overall improving trend for that location.

The water quality at Hamilton Harbour beaches is tested four times each week. According to the Public Health website, “a beach is considered not safe for swimming when an average of greater than 100 E.coli bacteria per 100 mL water were present” in samples.

The results are in stark contrast to the remainder of Hamilton beaches outside the bay, all of which have very high water quality levels.

The Lake Ontario beaches, for example — Beach Boulevard, Confederation Park and Van Wagners — have each been closed only one day this summer due to degraded water quality, and two Conservation beaches — Binbrook and Christie —have not been closed at all so far this year. Valens beach has been closed on four occasions.

Since 2010, the Lake Ontario and Conservation beaches have remained open over 90 per cent of the time.

Birds behind low water quality

Swimming in Hamilton's bay was banned by the Hamiton Harbour Commissioners in the 1930s because of unchecked industrial pollution and sewage. The harbor cleanup began in earnest in the 1980s tackling industrial discharges. When the parks opened their beaches in the early 1990s, they were heralded as a sign of significant progress in the cleanup of the harbor, with swimming in the bay once again possible.

That promise has not been realized and report cards on the progress of the cleanup continually cite the poor performance of the beaches as an area that needs work.

The answer to why the water quality at the Harbour beaches — and Bayfront in particular — is far worse than other Hamilton beaches is clear, according to John Hall.

“Birds. It's the birds.”

Hall is a coordinator with Hamilton Harbour's Remedial Action Plan, the multi-stakeholder organization created in the 1980s to improve the harbour's environmental conditions.

He said that the water's high levels of E. coli are primarily the result of bird feces from Canada geese and seagulls.

Hall said that the birds are drawn to the area by the grass clippings from freshly mown lawns near the beaches.

“After the grass is mown, there is lots of grass for the birds to feed on. Geese defecate every seven minutes, so if you multiply that by the number of geese that are regularly drawn to the area…”

Humans contribute significantly to the problem as well.

“People feed the birds, so the birds have lost their fear of people. Now they're attracted to people, in fact.”

Adding to the bird-related problem is a circulation issue; water in that area of the Harbour area is not flushed out as thoroughly as it is in other beaches.

Scott Peck, director of watershed planning and engineering at the Hamilton Conservation Authority, said that the fecal matter in still waters can fester and spread, causing water quality levels to plummet.

He said that Conservation beaches are consistently clean because the beaches' “man-made reservoirs flush water through constantly.”

Identifying the problems have been straightforward for the organizations tasked with improving water quality, but efforts to solve the problem have met with mixed results.

Many strategies

Over the years, a variety of measures designed to clean up the beaches have been implemented.

Chris McLaughlin, executive director of the Bay Area Restoration Council (BARC), said that his organization in 2008 launched a 'Don't Feed Waterfowl' campaign designed to dissuade park-goers from giving food to hungry birds.

BARC has also ringed the perimeter of the beaches with fences and buoy lines to prevent birds from swimming or waddling into areas designated for swimming.

Hamilton's Public Works department and Hamilton Conservation Authority have spent considerable energies raking the Harbour beaches to collect and dispose of bird droppings before they seep into the water, and installing catch basins to collect run-off water tainted with fecal matter.

And Hall said that his restoration team is planting rows of vegetation screens to “make the geese feel vulnerable to predators,” but it has proven difficult to trick the wily geese. “The birds are really smart. They send guard geese up on a hill to survey the lay of the land.”

Not me

On a warm sunny afternoon at Bayfront, the beach is deserted save for a collection of seagulls frolicking luxuriously in the surf. The only people in sight are two rollerbladers resting on a grassy patch that looks out over the water.

When asked if they would consider swimming in the Bayfront waters, the two immediately burst into laughter.

“I would never swim in there!” declares Allison Gowan, 25. “I saw a family in there yesterday and I was like, 'are they crazy?'”

Gowan's friend, Helen Matias, 30, agrees.

“You would never get me in there.”

Over at Pier 4 beach, a man and his daughter play in the sand near a large sign imploring beachgoers not to feed the birds.

“Would I swim in there? No, never,” said Peter Shi. “It doesn't seem clean.”

Asked if he would reconsider if inspectors found the waters at the harbour as consistently clean as Hamilton's other beaches, Shi frowns thoughtfully.

“If I got that kind of information, then I might say yes.”

Shi squints out over the still blue water as his daughter sings at his feet.

“But I don't know.”

[ScreamingViking]

I have to wonder whether the effort is worth it at those beaches. I've got nothing against beaches, but is it that important that we have swimming in that area?

Cleaning up pollution in the harbour has been completely worthwhile. I can't imagine what the bay and this city would be like if all that work had not been undertaken. There is still a ways to go (Randle Reef, sewage outflows during storms, other industrial pollution and runoff issues), but the progress has been remarkable.

Now that West Harbour has been made a "people place" it's going to be very difficult to control the problems with birds. As the article says, the birds are smart, and many people aren't going to pay mind to the signs about not feeding them (smart birds, not-so-smart people ). How much will any of the measures noted above accomplish, more than marginal impacts? You can't introduce predators, and you can't get rid of the people without taking away the people-place.

Bird populations seem well established. How do you get rid of the geese and gulls now, without taking drastic action? Should we even try?

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

I have to wonder whether the effort is worth it at those beaches. I've got nothing against beaches, but is it that important that we have swimming in that area?

Cleaning up pollution in the harbour has been completely worthwhile. I can't imagine what the bay and this city would be like if all that work had not been undertaken. There is still a ways to go (Randle Reef, sewage outflows during storms, other industrial pollution and runoff issues), but the progress has been remarkable.

Now that West Harbour has been made a "people place" it's going to be very difficult to control the problems with birds. As the article says, the birds are smart, and many people aren't going to pay mind to the signs about not feeding them (smart birds, not-so-smart people ). How much will any of the measures noted above accomplish, more than marginal impacts? You can't introduce predators, and you can't get rid of the people without taking away the people-place.

Bird populations seem well established. How do you get rid of the geese and gulls now, without taking drastic action? Should we even try?

The swimming thing was always the goal when they started to clean up the harbour. It was the incentive they used to get support for the cleanup years ago. Back then there were many living in this city who remembered swimming there when they were children so it was pursued from a nostalgic point of view.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

It's such a shame we can't swim in the bay. I wouldn't go into Ontario either - not in this area, at least.

[movingtohamilton]

Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce

It's such a shame we can't swim in the bay. I wouldn't go into Ontario either - not in this area, at least.

Contrast that with Toronto. Globe and Mail article today.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle13933727/

[Dr Awesomesauce]

^I love the Islands. I also love the West Harbour and Cootes Paradise. Wonderful places.

I'm not sure about the premise of this article. I understand that bird sh*te is an issue with water quality but given that toxic hot spot sitting out there, is poop really our biggest concern? It just seems the much-maligned Canada Goose is our scape goat for so many things.

[thistleclub]

Miller, Jason Lawrence, ”Germline Mutations And Reproductive Effects In Fathead Minnows Exposed To Contaminated Sediments From Randle Reef, Hamilton Harbour”
(2009). Open Access Dissertations and Theses. Paper 4519.

Young, Jennifer A.M., ”Factors Affecting Population Dynamics of the Invasive Round Goby (Neogobius melanostorrws)”
(2009). Open Access Dissertations and Theses. Paper 4586.

Bowley, Lucas A., “Endocrine Disruption In Round Goby (Neogobius Melanostomus) From Hamilton Harbour”
(2010). Open Access Dissertations and Theses. Paper 4097.

Sopinka, Natalie M., “Impact of Environmental Contaminants on Sperm”
(2010). Open Access Dissertations and Theses. Paper 4468.

Marentette, Julie R., ”Sex, Contamination and Movement in an Invasive Fish”
(2011). Open Access Dissertations and Theses. Paper 6210.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by bigguy1231

The swimming thing was always the goal when they started to clean up the harbour. It was the incentive they used to get support for the cleanup years ago. Back then there were many living in this city who remembered swimming there when they were children so it was pursued from a nostalgic point of view.

I vaguely remember mentions to that. I was still in high school when they started thinking about this, which led to the Remedial Action Plan in 1992. I also remember much publicized "swims" by Mayor Morrow and later on Sheila Copps.

At the time, they probably didn't consider how much the bird issue would affect water quality (or perhaps that there would even be a bird issue), given the much bigger concerns.

[hammerton]

I spent about an hour swimming in the canal water at the Toronto Islands as part of a kayaking course a couple of weeks ago. First time in my 32 years of living in the area that I entered Lake Ontario. So far so good, no fungus or any signs of poisoning. I eargerly await for the day the waters around Hamilton are swimmable.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by ScreamingViking

I vaguely remember mentions to that. I was still in high school when they started thinking about this, which led to the Remedial Action Plan in 1992. I also remember much publicized "swims" by Mayor Morrow and later on Sheila Copps.

At the time, they probably didn't consider how much the bird issue would affect water quality (or perhaps that there would even be a bird issue), given the much bigger concerns.

The bird issue wasn't an issue back then since they didn't test for that kind of contamination. They were more worried about man made chemicals and pollutants. I'd say they have been fairly successful in cleaning up the man made problems as evidenced by the resurgence of wildlife and the flora, I don't think they ever thought that a healthy harbour would attract wildlife that would create new problems.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by hammerton

I spent about an hour swimming in the canal water at the Toronto Islands as part of a kayaking course a couple of weeks ago. First time in my 32 years of living in the area that I entered Lake Ontario. So far so good, no fungus or any signs of poisoning. I eargerly await for the day the waters around Hamilton are swimmable.

The lake is cleaner today than it has been in over 100 years. I remember as a child back in the early 70's being at the beach and seeing thousands of dead fish washed up on shore. It was real nasty back then. Many people today are basing their opinions of the lake on things from yesteryear rather than todays reality. The lake is safe to swim in except for the odd day when natural contaminants from birds create problems on the beaches.